What's new
By:
Filters

BRAND NEW "EVOLUTION" THREAD

Which animals could you kill with no weapon?

  • Total voters
    17
I think you are thinking about Chessmaster 8000 or 9000. I regularly beat Chessmaster 3000 on its highest setting when I played seriously but it's been over a decade really that I played that much. I haven't played the newer versions (8000 or 9000), but I know that 9000 beat Larry Christianson. The last one I had on my computer was 5500 or 6000, and I don't recall beating it on the highest setting. At the same time, my game play was dropping off due to other things taking my time. Now I play with a couple of chess clubs and mostly only play computer chess on my phone just for ****s and giggles. I don't have a chess program on my computer at all anymore.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I think you are thinking about Chessmaster 8000 or 9000. I regularly beat Chessmaster 3000 on its highest setting when I played seriously but it's been over a decade really that I played that much. I haven't played the newer versions (8000 or 9000), but I know that 9000 beat Larry Christianson. The last one I had on my computer was 5500 or 6000, and I don't recall beating it on the highest setting. At the same time, my game play was dropping off due to other things taking my time. Now I play with a couple of chess clubs and mostly only play computer chess on my phone just for ****s and giggles. I don't have a chess program on my computer at all anymore.
Click to expand...

I meant the latest Chess Master program at a rating of 3000 (which I believe is highest).
 
BTW, it seems I'm the only one who doubts he can take on a street dog in a fight. I guess it depends on the situation, but if it was a large dog who was prepared for the fight, I think it would be difficult to beat. It would at least be difficult to beat without me getting seriously injured and requiring hospitalization.
 
Siro said:
BTW, it seems I'm the only one who doubts he can take on a street dog in a fight. I guess it depends on the situation, but if it was a large dog who was prepared for the fight, I think it would be difficult to beat. It would at least be difficult to beat without me getting seriously injured and requiring hospitalization.
Click to expand...

Let me educate since you cannot learn for yourself. Street dog have fight or flight just as every animal. It is not question of beating in death match. It is question if fight you can put make work more than your dead carcass is worth in calories. This is basics in evolution theories.
 
Siro said:
BTW, it seems I'm the only one who doubts he can take on a street dog in a fight. I guess it depends on the situation, but if it was a large dog who was prepared for the fight, I think it would be difficult to beat. It would at least be difficult to beat without me getting seriously injured and requiring hospitalization.
Click to expand...
"Dog" is a pretty broad category, and while I can imagine dogs that I do not think I could kill in a hand to hand fight, I can also imagine dogs that I'm fairly certain I could destroy.
tumblr_ma27ruVJPr1qhh1ddo1_500.jpg
 
scootsy said:
After watching the video of the Indian being carried away by the tiger, I'd like to get some feedback from everyone. How did humans rise to the top of the evolutionary ladder? No claws, no fangs, no poison... We rose due to our intellectual capacities...

BUT DAMMIT, WE CAN STILL FIGHT!!!

I literally think about this concept at least once a month, constantly revising my list, and forming new strategies. WHICH ANIMALS COULD YOU KILL WITH NO WEAPON OTHER THAN YOUR BODY?

Yes, tigers weigh 500+ pounds with incredible strength, powerful jaws, and sharp claws. But I'm am certain I could kill one. Predators instinctual attack patterns vary. A tigers? They will either (a) overpower you and chomp through your skull, or (b) inflict deep lacerations and wait for you to bleed out. If we weren't so overcome by fear and timidity, what would your plan of attack be? We could claw, we could bite, but we do not have enough blood in our own bodies to last in a fight like that. Or best chance is... suffocation. When the tiger pounces, you will not be able to escape. Too fast, too powerful. So you sacrifice a limb, allow the tiger to grab your arm or leg. Ideally you would be like Moses and have a stick, or staff that could possibly momentarily play the same role. With whatever remaining appendage you have though, you then apply the chokehold. We have some advantage with animals like the cats. Their limbs are relatively short. You can actually get close enough to do this. It becomes more difficult with animals like deer, or moose. But you choke 'em out, and then hope to have some needle and thread around.

Yes evolution was put in quotations as an inflammatory gesture, but really just signified that this thread was only loosely about evolution.
Click to expand...

Holy ****, bro. You never watch 2001: A Space Odyssey? This is how we rose to the top. As chronicled by Kubrick long ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmX7K8noikE

Sans dutch, we got brains and reason and ish
 
How can you live with yourself, Dutch, knowing that with each passing moment, billions of innocent bacteria are murderer through your careless actions. Scratch an itch? There goes entire clans. Take a bite of food? Countless are incinerated in your stomach acids. And when you shower... Bacteria has a new national holiday to commemorate the genocide.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I don't want to meat one either. But I think I could at least put out its eyes before it killed me. If I could blind it I could get away from it. Rams rarely think about going for the eyes.
Click to expand...

If you knew it was coming at you then maybe. If you didn't you don't stand a chance.
 
Siro said:
Um no. It actually is true. A computer does have a finite capacity (duh), ...
Click to expand...

Neither of you are wrong; I think you are talking past each other. I understood babe to be saying that, if a human is allowed to thoroughly study the inner workings of a program and explore how it reacts, they are usually able to devise a plan or five to defeat it (Nakamura has posted a few examples of this). You are saying that, if the computer is being treated as a regular opponent, it can out-perform a human. Both positions seem to be correct.
 
babe said:
And, for that matter, the fact is chess is indeed infinite.
Click to expand...

If neither player claims a draw, a game can go on indefinitely even when there are just two kings on the board. However, when we allow for the usual drawing conditions (such as 50 moves without a capture or pawn move), chess is finite.
 
On the fighting animals part:

Chimpanzees have about four times the strength that humans do (they have better muscle attachment points), and leopards regularly prey on lone chimpanzees. Anyone who thinks a human can take on a mountain lion barehanded is kidding themself. The reality is that an animal is not going to hold still while you try to gouge it's eyes out, or conduct any other plan you think might work.

Depending on the size, a dog is possible.
 
Siro said:
How can you live with yourself, Dutch, knowing that with each passing moment, billions of innocent bacteria are murderer through your careless actions. Scratch an itch? There goes entire clans. Take a bite of food? Countless are incinerated in your stomach acids. And when you shower... Bacteria has a new national holiday to commemorate the genocide.
Click to expand...

bacwho?

never met 1. they are as imaginary as obamas birth certificate
 
One Brow said:
Neither of you are wrong; I think you are talking past each other. I understood babe to be saying that, if a human is allowed to thoroughly study the inner workings of a program and explore how it reacts, they are usually able to devise a plan or five to defeat it (Nakamura has posted a few examples of this). You are saying that, if the computer is being treated as a regular opponent, it can out-perform a human. Both positions seem to be correct.
Click to expand...
You honestly think that a human could beat the most powerful chess playing computer if only he had the opportunity to inspect the programming? I think you and Babe are vastly underestimating how much more efficient the computer is at processing all of the alternative plays than the human mind is.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
You honestly think that a human could beat the most powerful chess playing computer if only he had the opportunity to inspect the programming? I think you and Babe are vastly underestimating how much more efficient the computer is at processing all of the alternative plays than the human mind is.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned, Nakamura has posted some examples where he does just that (perhaps not with the most powerful). When a person has done something, I make it a point to believe that they can do it. If the program is static, humans can figure out how to beat it. That's different from saying the human is a stronger player generally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top