Checkmate: IBM’s Deep Blue Team Discuss the World Comp Chess

[Vinvin]

Video (Saturday, June 1, 2013)

http://worldsciencefestival.com/videos/ ... heckmate_i

Not long ago, the idea of a computer beating a human at chess was the stuff of science fiction. But some of the most creative programmers of the 1980s and 90s were determined to make it a reality. And they did. In two matches that riveted the world, Deep Blue, the IBM supercomputer, took on the brilliant world chess champion Garry Kasparov, and finally the computer won. Check out WSF’s fascinating discussion with computer scientist Murray Campbell, and grand master Joel Benjamin, two key members of IBM’s team involved in the epic match-up between man and machine. This discussion took place during the event Checkmate: How Computer Chess Changed the World on Saturday, June 1, 2013.

Featuring
Joel Benjamin Chess Grandmaster
Murray Campbell Computer Scientist

[Werewolf]

I wish these guys continued to develop DB. Great interview.

[Thomas Lagershausen]

Mr Campell is talking like a blind man over the colour of a flower.

He isn´t able to evaluate this games of DeepBlue against Kasparov.

It was poor chess of Kasparov.

Kasparov played in game 6 a opening that he didn´t understand and lost like a beginner in chess.

I am in general not impressed by the chess computers are playing.

Computers didn´t play great chess. They need weak moves of a human to win a game.

Aronian would win a serious match against every computer of the world.

My two cent.

[Uri Blass]

Mr Campell is talking like a blind man over the colour of a flower.

He isn´t able to evaluate this games of DeepBlue against Kasparov.

It was poor chess of Kasparov.

Kasparov played in game 6 a opening that he didn´t understand and lost like a beginner in chess.

I am in general not impressed by the chess computers are playing.

Computers didn´t play great chess. They need weak moves of a human to win a game.

Aronian would win a serious match against every computer of the world.

My two cent.

You always need weak moves of the opponent to win otherwise chess is a draw.

I do not believe humans today have a chance against computers
because more than 10 years ago when computers were significantly weaker(both software and hardware) they already performed at super GM level against humans and not against a single human because it included also tournaments when the computers played against many humans.

Edit:I can add that I do not agree that kasparov played like a beginner.

beginners play stupid blunders that computers can see that they are blunders by 1 or 2 ply search.

Kasparov did not do a stupid blunder so he clearly played better than a beginner in game 6.

Note that I do not claim that game 6 was a good game of kasparov
but I know how beginners play and kasparov clearly played better than them and I think that it is possible that with the same moves kasparov could beat at least other chess programs or strong humans(note that I do not claim that kasparov could beat GM's with the same moves and I do not know but even if kasparov played at level of 2300 in the last game then it is clearly better than a beginner).

[rabbits]

Wise words Uri, wise words.
Allan