> We don’t need a neural net to also run the calculations or play a game of chess. That's actually one of the specific examples from the link I mentioned:- >

> We don’t need a neural net to also run the calculations or play a game of chess. That's actually one of the specific examples from the link I mentioned:- > In computer chess, the methods that defeated the world champion, Kasparov, in 1997, were based on massive, deep search. At the time, this was looked upon with dismay by the majority of computer-chess researchers who had pursued methods that leveraged human understanding of the special structure of chess. When a simpler, search-based approach with special hardware and software proved vastly more effective, these human-knowledge-based chess researchers were not good losers. They said that ``brute force" search may have won this time, but it was not a general strategy, and anyway it was not how people played chess. These researchers wanted methods based on human input to win and were disappointed when they did not. While it's true that they didn't use an LLM specifically, it's still an example of chucking loads of compute at the problem instead of something more elegant and human-like. Of course, I agree that if you're looking for a good game of chess, Stockfish is a better choice than ChatGPT.