Originally posted by KuntzFlash can think better than a computer. But those Computers already have the right scenerios in them and will ONLY choose the right one.
Actually since Deep Bluebeat the reigning Chess champion Gary Kasparov in 1997, top level computers have been able to beat humans. Supercomputers are much faster now🙂 Flash is much faster than they are 🙂 with good writing he should always get the right scenario!
http://www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/
-Kuntz 😄
Flash is not a computer(and especially not one designed for a single purpose) so has a higher chance of coming up with the WRONG scenerio.
Originally posted by Creshosk
Flash can think better than a computer. But those Computers already have the right scenerios in them and will ONLY choose the right one.Flash is not a computer(and especially not one designed for a single purpose) so has a higher chance of coming up with the WRONG scenerio.
No, not exactly, they generally go through different scenarios, based on combinations and possible sequences of moves, Others use a snapshot probability system. In working out scenarios flash is so fast he could get a pen and paper, write down all possible scenarios review them etc in the time it takes for someone else to react. We are talking billions of permutations at the speed of light 🙂
-Kuntz😄
Originally posted by KuntzThe computers still have the answers already, they just have to find them.
No, not exactly, they generally go through different scenarios, based on combinations and possible sequences of moves, Others use a snapshot probability system. In working out scenarios flash is so fast he could get a pen and paper, write down all possible scenarios review them etc in the time it takes for someone else to react. We are talking billions of permutations at the speed of light 🙂-Kuntz😄
Flash still has to come up with the answers himself.
He could probably still beat Spiderman, that's not what's in question.
I was just answering why Flash wasn't a genius.
Flash isn't a genius because he doesn't already have the answers. And coming up with the answers may not be his strong suit.
Originally posted by Creshosk
The computers still have the answers already, they just have to find them.Flash still has to come up with the answers himself.
He could probably still beat Spiderman, that's not what's in question.
I was just answering why Flash wasn't a genius.
Flash isn't a genius because he doesn't already have the answers. And coming up with the answers may not be his strong suit.
Not exactly its a case of running through yes and no's or probability gates, e.g. on, off and on/off. Flash can do exactly this even easier if he has a peice of paper thats how computers work. They do not have the answers in them😄
Computers today work on the quantum dot system for and, or, not gates🙂
-Kuntz 🍺 I'm sorry Cresh thats as simple as I can explain, it all he has to do is a superspeed flow diagram🙂
Keep the faith 🙂
-Kuntz😄
Originally posted by KuntzAnd if he's not very good at flow diagrams in the first place?
Not exactly its a case of running through yes and no's or probability gates, e.g. on, off and on/off. Flash can do exactly this even easier if he has a peice of paper thats how computers work. They do not have the answers in them😄Computers today work on the quantum dot system for and, or, not gates🙂
-Kuntz 🍺 I'm sorry Cresh thats as simple as I can explain, it all he has to do is a superspeed flow diagram🙂
Keep the faith 🙂
-Kuntz😄
Because he still has to come up with the plan. And beleive it or not a computer does what it's programmed to do. and can't do what it's not programmed to do.
For example Flash vs Deep Blue would wind up with Deep Blue winning if Flash sucked ass at chess.
Originally posted by Creshosk
And if he's not very good at flow diagrams in the first place?Because he still has to come up with the plan. And beleive it or not a computer does what it's programmed to do. and can't do what it's not programmed to do.
For example Flash vs Deep Blue would wind up with Deep Blue winning if Flash sucked ass at chess.
Wally is quite intelligent he went to College. If you have time to go over everything you can be very thick computers are, they just know the rules and can play out scenarios. Computers are not good at chess. They have no "skill" at all they can just perform different possiblities very fast.
-Kuntz 🍺
Originally posted by KuntzYou're grasping at straws now.
Wally is quite intelligent he went to College. If you have time to go over everything you can be very thick computers are, they just know the rules and can play out scenarios. Computers are not good at chess. They have no "skill" at all they can just perform different possiblities very fast.-Kuntz 🍺
Computers that are programmed for chess are not good at chess?
That's funny, I thought they had a high win ratio. . . now you're switching things around because I gave you a scenerio of what I meant?
No seriously, do you even listen to yourself?
Originally posted by Creshosk
You're grasping at straws now.Computers that are programmed for chess are not good at chess?
That's funny, I thought they had a high win ratio. . . now you're switching things around because I gave you a scenerio of what I meant?
No seriously, do you even listen to yourself?
They have no skills at all. They purely work by using probabilities they don't understand what they are doing🙂
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/wonews/mar03/chesscom.html
Read and understand this (sigh)
In his book, Behind Deep Blue: Building the Computer that Defeated the World Chess Champion http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7342.html, Hsu (who left IBM in 1999) says that Grandmaster Joel Benjamin, a consultant to IBM, suggested assigning a certain value to files that were not open, but merely potentially open. That way, the computer would tend to place its rooks along the future file and thus be in a better position to dominate it when it did open. The result, to Kasparov's eyes, was a deeply conceived, strategic plan. Of course, the computer didn’t have such a plan, any more than bees plan to build a perfect hexagonal cell out of wax. They do so by following a very simple algorithm: if-this-then-that.
-Kuntz🍺
Originally posted by KuntzObviously. . . and that's what it takes to be good at chess.
They have no skills at all. They purely work by using probabilities they don't understand what they are doing🙂http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/wonews/mar03/chesscom.html
Read and understand this (sigh)
-Kuntz🍺
They are good at chess because they win at chess alot.
They don't need to understand what they are doing. But that doesn't change that they are good at it.
Armor peircing bullets are good at peircing armor.
Cat's are good at being cats.
I doubt either understands what they are, but that doesn't change the nature of what they indeed are.
Computers are good at computing. They don't need to understand that.
Coputers that win at chess are good at winning chess, regardless of "skill" or "understanding."
Originally posted by Creshosk
Obviously. . . and that's what it takes to be good at chess.They are good at chess because they win at chess alot.
They don't need to understand what they are doing. But that doesn't change that they are good at it.
Armor peircing bullets are good at peircing armor.
Cat's are good at being cats.
I doubt either understands what they are, but that doesn't change the nature of what they indeed are.
Computers are good at computing. They don't need to understand that.
Coputers that win at chess are good at winning chess, regardless of "skill" or "understanding."
They are good at probabilities they do not know they are playing chess 🙂
They do not know anything
You agree then the answers are not already in them good 🙂
-Kuntz😄
Originally posted by KuntzNo I quite disagree. You're talking about a very basic computer that has no programing.
They are good at probabilities they do not know they are playing chess 🙂They do not know anything
You agree then the answers are not already in them good 🙂
-Kuntz😄
It's like saying that the computer doesn't have what we would define as a "picture" or "data assembled in such a way that it's displayed as a picture" or "data that interpreats and displays the data that is interpreted through this other data as what we would define as a picture"
💃
You don't see a banana, you see ons and offs only, nothing that could even be interpreted by an even more sophisticated computer as anything that even resembles a banana.
💃 Do you see a dancing banana? No you don't. There is no Banana as you only see what you want to see.
Originally posted by Creshosk
No I quite disagree. You're talking about a very basic computer that has no programing.It's like saying that the computer doesn't have what we would define as a "picture" or "data assembled in such a way that it's displayed as a picture" or "data that interpreats and displays the data that is interpreted through this other data as what we would define as a picture"
💃
You don't see a banana, you see ons and offs only, nothing that could even be interpreted by an even more sophisticated computer as anything that even resembles a banana.
💃 Do you see a dancing banana? No you don't. There is no Banana as you only see what you want to see.
I'm off to bed now but all your doing is agreeing with me, all computers work the same from the most simple to the most complex. They all follow a binary program the only thing that has changes is processing speed and the number of 0 and 1 that can be processed how it is displayed is immaterial to the discussion if you do not understand that, and you think a computer knows anything or has actual answers you are sadly confused. They can give an illusion with AI but really its doing exactly the same thing. You obviously need to watch less star trek. Processing speed is the key and Flash can do that in spades. Even though the rate has changed the concept of Moore's Law in Computing still holds true.
http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/
Read the Quantum dot or another simple guide to how a processor works at the Quantum level and you will see its all about options and probabilities. Nothing more nothing less.
Computers know nothing🙂
And if you think the flash can't operate like one all you have to realise is of course he can if he can answer yes no maybe etc.
-Kuntz🍺
Computers have the answers already in them 😆
No, they have no answers just calculations based on algorithms
Originally posted by KuntzBullets suck at killing people becuase they don't know they're killing them. . .
Computers know nothing🙂
You have to know something in order to be able to do it. . .
🙄
And Computers don't have the answers. . .right. . which is why they can't conclude what the best move is which is why they can't "move a piece" which is why they can't play chess which is why they never win.
Uh huh. . . Right. . .
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
But they still don't know they're playing chess, hence my point that thinking faster can still be effective, even if you don't "consciously" comprehend things.
Exactly the point I was making, I agree you just have more time to look at your options like a chess computer does🙂 Well done CM at least you understand.