Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
15:08 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General A new era in chess composition? |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 | | (61) Posted by Kevin Begley [Wednesday, Sep 14, 2011 23:18] |
KB: "a) You assume that one of your colleagues did not review his work."
DM> And you assume he did...
I assume nothing.
I make no claims as to any processes he employed (or did not employ) in creating his chess compositions.
I simply assert that his problems should be judged by their inherent, objective value.
How you judge individual composers, on the other hand, may (in fact, should) depend upon the entirety of their work.
KB: "b) You suggest a form of censorship be applied to this colleague (by attempting to redefine "chess composition" to exclude, entirely, his publication)."
DM>The 'censorship' accusation is pure fantasy although, as stated previously, I do wish Mr. Poisson had exercised discretion.
Fantasy? You declared that his compilation (essentially in its entirety) consists of problems which were "not composed."
This is a form of censorship...
KB: "It is slanderous to accuse a person of piracy for composing with the EGTB."
DM> My exact words were: "...seems tantamount to piracy". If there's a better word, feel free to correct me.
OK, I'll accept that this was unintentional -- but, I have difficulty suggesting a word -- I am not yet clear what you intend to express.
DM>It is my hope that [C.Poisson] reads this thread and considers his actions more carefully next time.
It is my hope that this thread might provide more philosophical clarity with respect to artificial creativity in chess composition.
Beyond that, I hope the delegates will consider legitimate ways to provide incentives for more selective publication.
| | | (62) Posted by Torsten Linß [Wednesday, Sep 14, 2011 23:21] |
KB:
QUOTE
You said: Wrong. Any odd programmer would have failed, because he/she doesn't know what to look for.
OK, I will revise my statement:
1) Any odd programmer who happened to see Forsberg's problem (or something like it),
2) Who also happened to have some basic appreciation of the value of Forsberg's twinning theme,
3) Who also had the idea to make a S#TB (and the ingenuity, and the free time, and the disk space, to pull it off!),
4) And, armed with this, they had the CREATIVE IDEA to query their database for such a twinning theme...
Now, name them!
| | | (63) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 00:46]; edited by Kevin Begley [11-09-15] |
>"Now, name them!"
You want me to name every programmer capable of realizing such a composition?
Look, it is not my intent to discount the challenges involved in creating a S#TB.
My background (EE/CS) provides me some appreciation of the complexity (and dedication!) involved in such a task.
Quite likely, I still don't fully appreciate the challenge -- excessive optimism tends to be a personal weakness -- but, I do try to factor in for things I don't know.
So, they'd need to be dedicated.
What practical incentive would such a programmer have?
If they know very little (or nothing) about chess/problems, why would they share this dedication?
Even if a programmer expected their effort to yield 12 masterpieces of equivalent value, they'd have to chance that our subjective judging system would award them, many years later, merely the FIDE Master title in chess composition.
This title -- and a dollar-fifty -- buys our disinterested programmer: a cup of coffee.
In short, a programmer does not profit by this extraordinary endeavor, unless they are able to appreciate the result.
So, as a practical matter, outside competition is not a concern.
That said...
Yes, I could name a number of highly capable individuals, with the ability to achieve this result.
But, you can not seriously believe that nobody else could possibly manage this -- right?
So, to what end should I name these individuals?
I raise the issue as a theoretical matter, because it this helps to demonstrate how the creative process (in chess composition) continues to change... I think, dramatically.
ps:
A modified EGTB interface might work for your S#TB (if you desire to make it available online).
But, I am certainly not implying that you should do this -- personally, I would not.
The alternative would be to publish it as a database of sound/unanticipated problems (compositions only, with your name on them).
This may not seem to you the most beneficial way to harvest your crop...
But, eventually, some pest will come along, and eat the entire field.
| | | (64) Posted by Dan Meinking [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 03:23] |
KB: "I assume nothing."
You "assume nothing" re: Mr. Poisson, but for those who disagree with you...
KB: "First, Christian's publication does not preclude a separation of "wheat from chaff."
KB: "Third, the claim that human editors have higher publication standards is hardly demonstrable..."
KB: "I, for one, refuse to accept that Chris Feather must depend upon some "actual human" to make "compositions"..."
KB: "I have witnessed many undercurrents of animosity, which I believe can be attributed, quite specifically, to the fact that Win Chloe is not offered as freeware."
KB: "There is considerable denial associated with the art of "composition" in the computer era."
KB: "How does humanity react to such a direct attack upon the fragile ego? Subversion, obstruction, disruption, and destruction -- we toss our wooden shoes into the gears -- of course!"
KB: "Any programmer could have managed it -- without ever possessing a trace of Torsten's composing talents."
KB: "The CODEX offers no requirement that an "actual human" be counseled, prior to a composer publishing their own work."
KB: "Not for objective reasons (unsound/anticipated), and certainly not for the subjective reasons you seem eager to selectively impose.
KB: "a) You assume that one of your colleagues did not review his work."
KB: "b) You suggest a form of censorship be applied to this colleague..."
KB: "And, Nikola seems to have joined you on the same, completely wrong track."
| | | (65) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 03:42] |
Just over two years ago, I composed a simple study with the help of the EGTB, and published it in this very forum.
I asked many notable study composers whether I had a right to claim credit.
The result, to my surprise, was virtually unanimous: I had every right.
Still, I elected to dedicate it, in part, to Nalimov & Thomson.
[Frankly, two years later, it hardly seems worthy of them.]
In that same thread, I commented:
"The EGTB is just a tool. If a complete rookie composer could write an EGTB to effortlessly find another Forsberg, we`d be knee deep in them."
At the time, I do not believe I was aware of any s# tablebases, nor was I aware of several s# compositions (w/ Forsberg style twins).
And, since then, I have come to realize that a complete rookie could, indeed, achieve this result -- though, certainly not "effortlessly."
But, it does show that the underlying creative idea (to scour a tablebase for Forsberg Twins) is not beyond anyone's imagination.
I don't much care how anymore how private tables affect the competitive nature of chess composition, for three reasons:
1) I do not compose for competitive purposes,
2) I have too little faith in our judgement system, and
3) I find the results (the problems themselves) to be very pleasing.
But, the sooner we these tables are completely published -- I don't much care whose name is on them, in any quantity -- the sooner we can all take part in a "review/evaluation/selection" of the gems.
| | | (66) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 03:50]; edited by Kevin Begley [11-09-15] |
Dan, please try to focus -- you are way off-track with this...
KB: "a) You assume that one of your colleagues did not review his work."
DM> And you assume he did...
I said I assumed no such thing.
It doesn't mean I never make assumptions -- though, many of the ones you list are NOT assumptions at all.
For example:
DM> You "assume nothing" re: Mr. Poisson, but for those who disagree with you...
KB: "First, Christian's publication does not preclude a separation of "wheat from chaff."
"...does not preclude..." <-- this is NOT an assumption -- are you having trouble with the language?
Moreover, the wheat & chaff WAS already separated -- as I noted: selected problems appeared in respected publications.
If you have any relevant assumptions, where I ASSUME that Christian DID REVIEW his problems, go ahead and list them...
I'll be happy to respond.
Otherwise, let's not engage in unnecessary diversions from the subject.
| | | (67) Posted by Dan Meinking [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 04:03] |
KB: "Moreover, the wheat & chaff WAS already separated -- as I noted: selected problems appeared in respected publications."
Another assumption. What composer separates wheat from chaff, then puts his name on the chaff?
| | | (68) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 04:05]; edited by Kevin Begley [11-09-15] |
In fact, I intend to forget the whole thread, entirely -- I regret having started it.
I was sincerely hoping that it might serve some beneficial purpose, but it seems completely impossible to carry on an intelligent discussion, here.
Dan asks: "What composer separates wheat from chaff, then puts his name on the chaff?"
Plenty of composers (if not all) have put their name on some "chaff" -- including you (and me too)!!
You want to hijack this thread -- this forum -- as a platform to hurl insults at a fellow composer (your "good companion")?
I will not be a party to it.
Therefore, with over 400 posts in this forum, I now retire.
No hard feelings... I hope.
Good bye, old friends.
kevinjbegley (at) gmail.com
| | | (69) Posted by Dan Meinking [Thursday, Sep 15, 2011 05:26] |
KB: "Dan asks: "What composer separates wheat from chaff, then puts his name on the chaff?"
Plenty of composers (if not all) have put their name on some "chaff" -- including you (and me too)!!"
No composer that I know of puts his name of thousands of chaff items, after parsing out a few grains of wheat.
KB: "You want to hijack this thread -- this forum -- as a platform to hurl insults at a fellow composer (your "good companion")? I will not be a party to it."
No, I simply refuse to let you "hijack" it. As far as insults go, please examine your own first.
That said, if anyone on this forum feels personally insulted by me, I apologize! I do not apologize, however, for standing up for what I believe.
| |
No more posts | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4
MatPlus.Net Forum General A new era in chess composition? |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
