If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
CCC Discusses Chess - Posts of Interest -What Is The Future Of Chess?
Re: CCC Discusses Chess - Posts of Interest -What Is The Future Of Chess?
Based on a google search I just did, the first page of results shown seemed to indicate there was no consensus of certainty about whether even quantum computing could be used to solve chess.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Based on a google search I just did, the first page of results shown seemed to indicate there was no consensus of certainty about whether even quantum computing could be used to solve chess.
the people in this thread who think chess will be solved (in the sense of absolute solving) are bad at math.
Never mind the limits of computational speed that is enough to kill the idea of solving chess, even if you managed to do that, you couldn't store the information. Constructing a 32 man tablebase would cover of order 10^120 move orders (google "shannnon number"). The number of atoms on the earth is of order 10^50 so even at storing 1 move per atom, you need 10^70 earths. (in fact, more than the number of estimated atoms in the observable unirverse). It's not going to happen.
Or have some basic knowledge of quantum information ;)
Computer science and physics have evolved a lot since the 70s, and such estimations are no longer valid.
Quantum computers do exist, although they are not that powerful for the moment. I've talked with several professors in this field, and solving chess is one of their goals, and there is no doubt that it is just a matter of time...
Yale's team in quantum computer has made considerable advances recently, and I guess we should be able to read papers from them very soon.
Re: CCC Discusses Chess - Posts of Interest -What Is The Future Of Chess?
The state of quantum computing today is like the state of computing in 1920. The Eniac was built in the 1940's. It will be a while before the quantum computer is a useful thing.
The state of quantum computing today is like the state of computing in 1920. The Eniac was built in the 1940's. It will be a while before the quantum computer is a useful thing.
Back then military necessity made even specialized research that was promising for military application (e.g. inventing a computer for codebreaking) proceed at a frantic pace, with resources lavishly poured in. In todays global economy, and with no large scale war clearly looming, it might take a while indeed for a practical quantum computer to be built.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
The state of quantum computing today is like the state of computing in 1920. The Eniac was built in the 1940's. It will be a while before the quantum computer is a useful thing.
The difference is that back then, nobody had really realize how important computers would be. Now that they are omnipresent everywhere, it is much different. The day we will not be able to upgrade traditonnal computers, many companies will spend colossal amount of money to develop quantum computers as soon as possible.
Lockheed Martin, for instance, was able to acquire the world's best quantum computer. Some research, showing that quantum computers are much more powerful than what some might think, has also been done : http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/08...g-problem.html
The difference is that back then, nobody had really realize how important computers would be. Now that they are omnipresent everywhere, it is much different. The day we will not be able to upgrade traditonnal computers, many companies will spend colossal amount of money to develop quantum computers as soon as possible.
Lockheed Martin, for instance, was able to acquire the world's best quantum computer. Some research, showing that quantum computers are much more powerful than what some might think, has also been done : http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/08...g-problem.html
I find it difficult to think that back in the 1940's there was no one who realized the enormous potential of computers (for good, but maybe not so much for ill...). Even go back to Alan Turing, whose mathematical research was before the 1940s, I seem to recall.
The problem with traditional computers for a long time was the size of the machine required. A number of technological developments finally solved that.
One barrier to researching quantum computers as much (or as soon) as it might be done is, as you in a way alluded to, the fact that traditional computers could be deemed useful, or sufficient, by many people (whether or not in governments or large companies) for perhaps decades to come.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Maybe, but don't forget that Bill Gates once said “640K ought to be enough for anybody.”
It would have been too if he didn't keep bloating up his programs. I can remember when programs would run on a single floppy drive of 360 k though with some complex programs you might have to load and swap some additional disks.
Back then military necessity made even specialized research that was promising for military application (e.g. inventing a computer for codebreaking) proceed at a frantic pace, with resources lavishly poured in. In todays global economy, and with no large scale war clearly looming, it might take a while indeed for a practical quantum computer to be built.
Was it on purpose that you mention codebreaking? Because codebreaking is precisely what a quantum computer will turn into child's play.
And so if there was a race in the 1940's to achieve a nuclear bomb, there should be such a race now to achieve the first practical quantum computer. One should seriously wonder if Iranian scientists are researching this. If they are, and if the Iranians get there first, we can expect the total collapse of the Western economy as all currently private information becomes public. If on the other hand the Americans get there first, it is to be hoped they will find a way to infect with unstoppable viruses the entire Iranian software infrastructure, thereby preventing them from ever getting a working quantum computer. There could be hackers right now being trained to do this as soon as the technology is available.
This all should be the plot of the next James Bond movie. Quantum computing is the most dangerous and disruptive technology concept ever imagined. More dangerous than nuclear, because there would likely be no "mutual assured destruction" (MAD). At least with MAD, you end up with a barren planet. With quantum technology, you would only have to have someone one day ahead of everybody else and you could conceivably end up with what I can only imagine as Big Brother raised to a very large exponent.
On the other hand, what you just read could be all doom and gloom and quantum computing will actually lift us all into an age of teleportation, holodecks, immortality and instant fact-checking on people like Mitt Romney.
And remember: Paul Beckwith is still out there. Even with quantum computing, we still have climate change to worry about.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Re: CCC Discusses Chess - Posts of Interest -What Is The Future Of Chess?
Yes codebreaking is a key application, and yes the sudden appearance of a working Iranian quantum computer would cause havoc, but you overrate the impact just as much as Y2K was overrated. Y2K would have been a serious problem if not for proactive fixing but it would never have been a disaster. Same here.
Before generally usable quantum-based decryption is available, quantum encoding will be here, and that code isn't breakable. The important stuff will be resecured using that technology, and the world will carry on.
Tweet
Comment