Sorry, George, but better late than never

[Terry McCracken]

From George Speight's topic post :

Christophe, Zach and Norman? Made a Promise- I Want It
Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:00 am
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25184

George Speight wrote:
-------------------------------------------------
With all due respect, i waited till the elections were over. A good while back you guys dragged Vas' program and reputation thru the mud with innuendos and theories. When questioned, you promised you would show me (and the rest of us) the evidence- but that it just took time to put it all together. Well, enough time has passed- more than enough- and i would like the promise kept. Just think of it as a Christmas present to all of us.

Best,
_________________
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/

---------------------------------------------------

hi George,
well it took a while, and we've all managed to endure years of your contemptuous ridicule...
but you now have your 'evidence' as promised, with almost all in universal agreement.

please don't bother to email your apology...i prefer you post it here publicly.

Norm

Look, I really did not want to reply to you, because I just dont like the idea of talking with the biggest cloner, fraud and cheat that ever posted here. Not a case of dragging your name thru the mud when i say this, because you have already admitted to it. You apologized and then had the balls to try it again. So though I have no interest in talking with you, I will take this opportunity to speak to the forum as a whole here. As good a time and place as any. I have become really good friends with a guy on this, and other forums. I promised him I would not mention his name. I have no control over whether anyone believes me here or not. Best and all I can do is be truthful. And his name will come out when the time is ready. And there is no one better with this programming and computer science stuff. We have been doing a lot of talking over this period of time, and I was given a crash course. Not in programming, but in shell games and bigamy. In shell games, always keep your eyes on what is being moved and to where, of course. You all know that. And a bigamist is fine and in good shape burning the candle at both ends, AS LONG AS the 2 wives never end up at the same place at the same time. But if and when that happens, that is when things begin to crumble before your very eyes. Of course i knew about shell games and bigamy- I just had no concept about how the two applied perfectly in this case against Vas. Tho we could not see each other, i had a mental picture of him rolling his eyes when i asked him point blank if Vas was guilty enough to be taken down completely in this farce. No need to ask me anything- I cant reply anyway. If you would like to just sit back and watch all this unfold, do so. If not, I dont really give a shit. But remember if you do want to just sit and wait, like me, remember to keep your eyes on the shells. Don't get diverted by bullshit talk. And what would source code have to do with bigamy? I will leave you to ponder on that. And all the most asked questions such as why he doesnt speak up more in his defence, and if he is so smart, why was he so stupid as to do what he obviously knew he couldnt get away with forever. Simple answer- he didn't do it. Dealing here with some slick people; but the problem is that the most important thing in their lives is their prestige. And it will crumble right before their eyes- brick by brick. Their world of computer chess will be a thing of the past for them. And it needs to be. And when the time is right, you will see the blame game played by certain people that will remind you of a hot frisbee- "get it away from me, I wasnt there for that." Or-"I tried to tell you but you wouldnt listen." At that point it will be every man for himself, but no cover will be provided. You can run but you cant hide. And it is very,very,very ironic that the only person who can save any of them at that time will be Vas himself. With a "the hell with computer chess. It's not worth all this crap. I need to make some real money"- attitude. I dont look for that, but I dont have a horse in the race, either. I asked my guy what would make them think they could pull it off, and he told me the strength in numbers plus forgetting the cardinal rule of "knowing when to hold em and when to fold em- when to walk away and when to run" . But remember i never said all 14 or so of them were guilty. Some were, just sadly, duped. At any rate, hang around. It's gonna be fun.

Are you through with the crazy talk of a mental patient?
It's illegal to make such allegations without proof. It's called slander and libel when in print.

You don't know what you're talking about, you're not a programmer. I don't know what your problem is but it's nasty and I suggest you deal with it rather than trolling on this board with veiled threats.

Don't forget to carry toilet paper with you. And some hand sanitizer might be in order.

Later, Einstein

You're a true Vulgarian aren't you? Sorry, but I think you're talking about yourself here George.

Compared to you I am an Einstein....lift the lid a little higher.....

[bob]

<sigh>

It is always "I know a guy, but I can't mention his name, but he is an expert and he said ..."

You've been predicting doom for those of us investigating Vas since it started. You were right about the doom, but not about the recipient. Not a soul is worried about how this was handled, there is too much science and experience involved. Is your "guy" really better than people like Ken Thompson? _really_?

Didn't think so...

The only thing left open is whether the FSF will jump in after reviewing the report themselves...

[geots]

<sigh>

It is always "I know a guy, but I can't mention his name, but he is an expert and he said ..."

You've been predicting doom for those of us investigating Vas since it started. You were right about the doom, but not about the recipient. Not a soul is worried about how this was handled, there is too much science and experience involved. Is your "guy" really better than people like Ken Thompson? _really_?

Didn't think so...

The only thing left open is whether the FSF will jump in after reviewing the report themselves...

Your bullshit doesnt even past the smell test. You are not the first tenured phd who thought God put him in charge of the world. Like I said, hang around. We're gonna have some fun with this. And by the way, the ruling that a person(s) make is only as good as the crapola they were sucked into looking at. All I see is a tired, vengeful, jealous old man.

[Terry McCracken]

<sigh>

It is always "I know a guy, but I can't mention his name, but he is an expert and he said ..."

You've been predicting doom for those of us investigating Vas since it started. You were right about the doom, but not about the recipient. Not a soul is worried about how this was handled, there is too much science and experience involved. Is your "guy" really better than people like Ken Thompson? _really_?

Didn't think so...

The only thing left open is whether the FSF will jump in after reviewing the report themselves...

Your bullshit doesnt even past the smell test. You are not the first tenured phd who thought God put him in charge of the world. Like I said, hang around. We're gonna have some fun with this. And by the way, the ruling that a person(s) make is only as good as the crapola they were sucked into looking at. All I see is a tired, vengeful, jealous old man.

You should be banned for your remarks. You said you were going to leave, so leave!

[geots]

<sigh>

It is always "I know a guy, but I can't mention his name, but he is an expert and he said ..."

You've been predicting doom for those of us investigating Vas since it started. You were right about the doom, but not about the recipient. Not a soul is worried about how this was handled, there is too much science and experience involved. Is your "guy" really better than people like Ken Thompson? _really_?

Didn't think so...

The only thing left open is whether the FSF will jump in after reviewing the report themselves...

Your bullshit doesnt even past the smell test. You are not the first tenured phd who thought God put him in charge of the world. Like I said, hang around. We're gonna have some fun with this. And by the way, the ruling that a person(s) make is only as good as the crapola they were sucked into looking at. All I see is a tired, vengeful, jealous old man.

You should be banned for your remarks. You said you were going to leave, so leave!

Thats the way the world works, Einstein. The fall from grace can hurt. But it generally doesnt last too long. You need to go get a good night's sleep.

[Terry McCracken]

<sigh>

It is always "I know a guy, but I can't mention his name, but he is an expert and he said ..."

You've been predicting doom for those of us investigating Vas since it started. You were right about the doom, but not about the recipient. Not a soul is worried about how this was handled, there is too much science and experience involved. Is your "guy" really better than people like Ken Thompson? _really_?

Didn't think so...

The only thing left open is whether the FSF will jump in after reviewing the report themselves...

Your bullshit doesnt even past the smell test. You are not the first tenured phd who thought God put him in charge of the world. Like I said, hang around. We're gonna have some fun with this. And by the way, the ruling that a person(s) make is only as good as the crapola they were sucked into looking at. All I see is a tired, vengeful, jealous old man.

You should be banned for your remarks. You said you were going to leave, so leave!

Thats the way the world works, Einstein. The fall from grace can hurt. But it generally doesnt last too long. You need to go get a good night's sleep.

I know how the world works very well, better than you apparently.

Childish sarcasm, doesn't increase the veracity of your position.

[kranium]

Look, I really did not want to reply to you, because I just dont like the idea of talking with the biggest cloner, fraud and cheat that ever posted here.

sorry, George...wrong again.

Vas R. has posted here previously, and his grand deception will go down in the halls of shame as as #1, head and shoulder above anything else...
not only for the amount of time he fooled you, the CCRL, and many many others, but also for the amount by which he profited from it.

the really sad thing is that you and the CCRL wouldn't (and still won't) listen to anybody...
not to the many many programmers and dozens knowledgeable individuals that indicated for years that there were serious issues w/ Rybka?
not to many that are more knowledgeable than you concerning these matters?

in every instance you arrogantly ridiculed each and every one of them...
and apparently still today remain in a complete state of denial concerning the truth.

it's pitiful really.

[geots]

Look, I really did not want to reply to you, because I just dont like the idea of talking with the biggest cloner, fraud and cheat that ever posted here.

sorry, George...wrong again.

Vas R. has posted here previously, and his grand deception will go down in the halls of shame as as #1, head and shoulder above anything else...
not only for the amount of time he fooled you, the CCRL, and many many others, but also for the amount by which he profited from it.

the really sad thing is that you and the CCRL wouldn't (and still won't) listen to anybody...
not to the many many programmers and dozens knowledgeable individuals that indicated for years that there were serious issues w/ Rybka?
not to many that are more knowledgeable than you concerning these matters?

in every instance you arrogantly ridiculed each and every one of them...
and apparently still today remain in a complete state of denial concerning the truth.

it's pitiful really.

Not an apology for sure. But you did make me have to no longer use my moniker concerning CCRL at the bottom of my threads. I had removed my logo. And should have removed it all. Don't hang anything i say or do on them. I am no longer a tester with them. They, by the way, are the greatest bunch of guys you could possibly ever be associated with and I will always be better off for having known and worked with them. Not many can claim to be as lucky as I was. Look, Norman- I dont have a thing in the world against you. But the facts were the facts. And I will say here, and it will become evident in the not too distant future, and more people will see the light. I am not a "Vas lover". But he is my friend. Which in no way means i am overlooking any wrongdoing he may or may not have done. But i wont let him be railroaded and be silent. Hell, take a few minutes and read all the threads. They are still full of "mights, maybes, and possibly." Does that sound to you like it's a done deal. Far from it. I will say here- and wont stutter: Anyone who will gather evidence in this manner by reverse engineering, knowing that that will be even less reliable, if its reliable for an overall verdict at all, HAS_AN_AGENDA. Shake hands, and you better count your fingers when you get your hand back. And the ones given the evidence after the code has been fiddled with, and he knows how it was gotten- he is worse. I dont give a flying shit if its 3 people, 14 people, or 1400 people. We have a serious lack of character on the part of these people, whoever they may be. Hell, 3 or 4 years ago one of the ringleaders here got caught- I suppose it was Beta 1, but it was some code that belonged to Vas. Chris Whitty caught him juggling code around to make something appear to be what it wasnt. And he never denied doing it! Look, this is not a man's hobby that is on the line here, but rather his bread and butter. And we have people- I read in another forum, who said "Well, we are at least 60% right, or close to that, I think." 60%, and he's not even goddam sure that is right!!!!! Im real sorry if this whole deal doesnt smell to you. Shit, if it was a real trial, none of these programmers would have been allowed close to any of this. Bad, bad conflict of interest. This is the ONE AND ONLY reason i have given up computer chess for good- forever. But im sure you dont care about that. I will close out here, with only one thing left to tell you. Because you brought up CCRL and cast doubt on their validity. I dont have a problem with you. You have never done anything to me. But I will tell you here and now, that if you want a debate over honesty and character- you better just stick with me. Because CCRL is way, way out of your league.

Nite, my friend. And if i hurt or offended you in any way- I am sorry. All i am trying to do is what i learned from my Dad when he was alive. Stick your neck out to deal with right and wrong. Sorting out right and wrong has never been a popularity contest, and never will be.

[Harvey Williamson]

This post i just found is a nice try to summarise things.

http://www.chess.com/news/rybka-banned- ... itles-3798

'I see a lot of assumptions and questions below about aspects of this case, so let me (as someone whose profession is in the software domain) attempt to offer some clarity from a code licensing perspective:

- Each piece of software is distributed under a certain license (of which there are many types) that the creator of the software decides on. The particular chosen license sets forth the rules of how the code and software may and may not be used, e.g., whether the code of the software is allowed to be reused/copied, and whether to do so requires attribution or payment. For software as an intellectual property, to not comply with the terms of a license is equivalent to stealing (from a legal perspective). So copying without attribution, in this case, makes the author liable for theft, at the least.

- That Rybka is superior in strength to the engines it has allegedly copied from is not surprising: it shows that more than copying has taken place, e.g., the application of some genuine creativity on the part of the creators of Rybka. That, however, does not mean that the copying is less of a violation, so the argument that it's better and therefore not exactly the same is moot; noone claimed that it's exactly the same, merely that portions of it are too much alike to be the result of mere independent creation coinciding by chance.

- The evaluation function is one of the most critical and distinguishing pieces of a chess engine; it's also the part that must be guarded the most if the author wishes to not be easily outdone. This is what makes some engines stronger than others. So copying the evaluation function is the same as grabbing the parts of highest value (without "paying" for them). As an analogy, if you visit a wine cellar and take away a $5 bottle without paying, the owner may choose to avoid the hassle of going after you, but if you took a vintage $5000 bottle away, they may be inclined differently.

- Whether we like or agree with the presence of licenses, especially restrictive licenses (like GPL, for those who know about it), is another point that has no relevance to the discussion. It's the author's choice what license to use, and it's their legal right to have their intellectual property protected from misuse under the terms of the chosen license. And yes, some licenses are generally preferable from the perspective of someone wishing to reuse code without too many strings attached (e.g., GPL isn't one of them).'

[AdminX]

This post i just found is a nice try to summarise things.

http://www.chess.com/news/rybka-banned- ... itles-3798

'I see a lot of assumptions and questions below about aspects of this case, so let me (as someone whose profession is in the software domain) attempt to offer some clarity from a code licensing perspective:

- Each piece of software is distributed under a certain license (of which there are many types) that the creator of the software decides on. The particular chosen license sets forth the rules of how the code and software may and may not be used, e.g., whether the code of the software is allowed to be reused/copied, and whether to do so requires attribution or payment. For software as an intellectual property, to not comply with the terms of a license is equivalent to stealing (from a legal perspective). So copying without attribution, in this case, makes the author liable for theft, at the least.

- That Rybka is superior in strength to the engines it has allegedly copied from is not surprising: it shows that more than copying has taken place, e.g., the application of some genuine creativity on the part of the creators of Rybka. That, however, does not mean that the copying is less of a violation, so the argument that it's better and therefore not exactly the same is moot; noone claimed that it's exactly the same, merely that portions of it are too much alike to be the result of mere independent creation coinciding by chance.

- The evaluation function is one of the most critical and distinguishing pieces of a chess engine; it's also the part that must be guarded the most if the author wishes to not be easily outdone. This is what makes some engines stronger than others. So copying the evaluation function is the same as grabbing the parts of highest value (without "paying" for them). As an analogy, if you visit a wine cellar and take away a $5 bottle without paying, the owner may choose to avoid the hassle of going after you, but if you took a vintage $5000 bottle away, they may be inclined differently.

- Whether we like or agree with the presence of licenses, especially restrictive licenses (like GPL, for those who know about it), is another point that has no relevance to the discussion. It's the author's choice what license to use, and it's their legal right to have their intellectual property protected from misuse under the terms of the chosen license. And yes, some licenses are generally preferable from the perspective of someone wishing to reuse code without too many strings attached (e.g., GPL isn't one of them).'

Yes Harvey, that is a great summary. To bad many (I am not one of them) feel it is okay because he added and created something stronger. Like saying Sony got hacked by hackers and personal information was stolen, but it's okay because they made Sony's security stronger.