Well said.  I am a seasoned tournament chess player and I agree with 
your analysis below.
RM>-> DEEP BLUE DEBRIEFING
RM>-> IBM's Deep Blue computer was programmed to evaluate a total of
RM>-> about 20 billion moves within the three-minute window allotted for
RM>-> each move in a formal chess match.  That capability is enough to
RM>-> consider every possible move and countermove 12 sequences ahead
RM>-> and selected lines of attack as much as 30 moves beyond that.  The
RM>-> fact that this omniscience was not enough to beat a mere human is
RM>-> "amazing," says one of Deep Blue's programmers.  The lesson here,
RM>-> says another, is that chess masters such as Kasparov "are doing
RM>-> some mysterious computation we can't figure out."
RM> 
RM>SK>Besides the comments about the abilities of the human mind, I
RM>SK>think this also underscores the position that computers will not
RM>SK>be able to replace human teachers in the classroom.
RM> 
RM>That might be stretching the point a bit !  I'm by no
RM>means an expert chess player, but my limited experience is
RM>that in addition to learning (and memorizing) the established 
RM>"lines", a chessmaster also develops a kind of "feel" for 
RM>positioning and game flow.  This leads him/her to sort of
RM>wander in a direction which "feels" right until the position
RM>or circumstances offer a clear series of moves to some end,
RM>whether it be a material gain (captures), positional gain 
RM>(initiative), or a conclusion (checkmate).  The computer,
RM>otoh, is reviewing known moves and/or making "choices" that
RM>are based upon unknown algorithms (and it is here that the 
RM>computer may be vulnerable; if its means of choicemaking in 
RM>situations which are nondefined are limited, the superior 
RM>"feel" of the chessmaster should prevail).  My guess is that 
RM>if the chessmaster can stay even through the opening, which 
RM>is the most clearly defined portion of the game, s/he can 
RM>take the initiative in the middle game which is much more 
RM>fluid and ill-defined.
RM> 
RM>In this sense, the "flow" in the classroom might be something
RM>which a computer will not be able to follow either, and may,
RM>indeed, indicate that human teachers will not be replaced by
RM>them.....
RM>___
RM> * MR/2 2.26 * DOS=HIGH? I knew it was on something...
RM>--- Silver Xpress Mail System 5.4P1a
RM>(1:2624/302)
* CMPQwk #1.42* UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
--- GEcho 1.11+
---------------