back


29890Kenneth Lovering
2020-01-29 14:39:55
@queen13
I use the Windows x64 for modern computers version. I don't know what you mean by BMI.
29889David
2020-01-29 12:40:20
:)queen13
Yeah, I have to to define what smart is first...
because you don't know it...
29888queen13
2020-01-29 11:52:02
@ Kenneth Lovering

Wait for a better explanation but I think that it has to do with how they were compiled.

Or maybe you are not using the best exe for your computer.

Are you using the BMI one?
29887queen13
2020-01-29 11:47:30
@David
>The day you show that a machine is "smart", you will demonstrate that man is a machine and that intelligence does not exist.


One needs to define what smart is first...

In any case, man is a machine.
A biological machine. Man consists of systems that have subsystems that have subsystems...
Chemisrty in action all arround...

I don't think that the statement is correct.
If a machine becomes human-level smart, indistinguishable from human as to whether it holds "true" intelligence or not, then it does not follow that intelligence doesn't exist.
Maybe the machine is smart in exactly the same way that we think of humans as smart.
Maybe the machine is not smart in exactly the same way and it only appears to be smart without any "real thinking".
I think that by observation we wouldn't know what is true. We could only know this if we know the inner workings of a machine.

It's already debatable whether intelligence exists in the way you are proposing.
It's not like one could prove that there's any actual thinking as opposed to "seeming to be thinking". Could you show that you are not a robot that is not actually thinking but only giving the appearance of thinking?
Unless you refer to the way the human brain works etc, I don't think you could do it in any way.
29886Kenneth Lovering
2020-01-29 07:52:30
Why does Stockfish 11 run about 13% slower than the DVs? For instance, in the position I have setup now, SF11 runs at 10,865 kN/s & the latest DV runs at 12,488. This is the common difference in almost all positions. Usually around 10% slower. I run it with 10 threads. 4 threads are virtual.
29885David
2020-01-29 06:59:06
∞ Queen 13
The day you show that a machine is "smart", you will demonstrate that man is a machine and that intelligence does not exist.
29884queen13
2020-01-28 17:40:38
@David

All of those may be solvable by a super-ai though...

Then you could think of an infinite board and infinite pieces and unless there's a smart solution the ai no matter how smart, would need infinite resources to solve it and those may be unavailable so it wouldn't matter if the ai is infinitely smart(or maybe it means that the ai can't be infinitely smart)
29883queen13
2020-01-28 17:34:21
>SF devs are on fire right now 🔥🔥🔥

I am usually not paying that close of an attention but I am happy to hear that ! :)
29882Mrert
2020-01-28 16:34:43
SF devs are on fire right now 🔥🔥🔥
29881Hovhannes
2020-01-28 16:08:26
2m+5s
29880Hovhannes
2020-01-28 16:07:49
1 Stockfish_20012810_x64_bmi2 11.5/20 =1======1==========1
2 Stockfish_19111809_x64_bmi2 8.5/20 =0======0==========0
Shuffle chess
core i5 3/4 core,ponder off
ram 4200mb (installed 16gb)
29879Hovhannaes
2020-01-28 08:30:48
1: Stockfish_20012319_x64_bmi2 12.0/24 ===========0=========1==
1: Stockfish_19111809_x64_bmi2 12.0/24 ===========1=========0==
Shuffle chess
25m+10s
core i9 3/15 core,ponder on
10gb ram each (installed 64gb)
29878David
2020-01-28 06:33:39
@queen13
and that day, the day of the final solution, I will add a pawn and if necessary another King, and then another one and then a thousand to make you a spite ....
29877queen13
2020-01-27 23:44:13
>Will a Chess Engine Ever Solve The Kings & Pawns Game ?

I believe that yes but it may take a lot of time until we have such an engine.
29876WCN
2020-01-27 20:12:27
Will a Chess Engine Ever Solve The Kings & Pawns Game ? By A.R.B :)

https://groups.google.com/forum/?nomobile=true#!topic/fishcooking/mgz2-3XYI8Y





WCN
29875queen13
2020-01-27 15:20:11
>Here's Why AI Can't Solve Everything

Meaning nowadays.
The point is that it is possible to find very good ai solutions and they are waiting to be discovered.
The human brain works a certain way.
If chemistry can do it then it should be possible to create a machine that will do the same.
We are very long from doing that it seems... Maybe the exponential scientific progress can get us there faster than it seems.

Right now humans excel at many tasks that ai can't even handle but that may soon change.
29874queen13
2020-01-27 15:06:59
@David
That's an understatement.
For most common conditions(not extremely good hardware and gpu cards) it's the best !
At the most extreme conditions it's still doing pretty well even if lc0 is slightly better.

I would like to see neural stockfish as well but I am thinking that then it wouldn't be stockfish.
Lc0 is in essense a neural version of stockfish (if you change the name... I don't see how a neural stockfish would be much different than that but I would be glad to see that)
29873WCN
2020-01-27 06:31:15
Here's Why AI Can't Solve Everything

https://groups.google.com/forum/?nomobile=true#!topic/fishcooking/8Z4A02UFgLk





WCN
29872David
2020-01-26 14:47:15
Yes, The old fish is still a strong engine.
I would like to see a neural version of Stockfish, alongside the traditional version.
29871queen13
2020-01-26 14:33:37
@Kenneth Lovering

the development builds are better but sometimes there are rare stability issues.
29870David
2020-01-26 11:22:57
And Stockfish is stronger, and its developments ... and its evolution ...
Slogan!
like Einstein's relative brain of the cosmic void, and the quantum annihilation of Bohr's thought.
The impossible nothingness of the nonexistent.
It is Lc0 because she wins.
29869David
2020-01-26 11:06:26
Lovering:
No elementary dialogical or interrogative relationship is possible if an indisputable identity between supersensitive entity and rhetorical terminology is not established.
"Stockfish" does not exist and its "developments" are antimatter for every intellectual reality.
29868David
2020-01-26 11:06:26
Lovering:
No elementary dialogical or interrogative relationship is possible if an indisputable identity between supersensitive entity and rhetorical terminology is not established.
"Stockfish" does not exist and its "developments" are antimatter for every intellectual reality.
29867Kenneth Lovering
2020-01-26 04:36:04
So, what is better? Stockfish 11 or the development builds?
29866queen13
2020-01-25 10:41:10
At ccc

next page >
single page