CB: Feedback on the ICGA/Rybka disqualification scandal

[JuLieN]

Would like to have the patch too.

I've put all the links in the beginning of my big post above Here they are again:

Missed that one

But unfortunately the patch won't run under Windows7-64-bit.

I don't consider it very important, the depth -2 obfuscation is known and as far as I know never disputed, the main-line obfuscation is also an issue I missed at the time it was discussed.

As I wrote in the previous post, the source code in Pascal was in the patch archive, so you can compile it with the FreePascal as I did.

If you don't want to install the Free Pascal compiler (I always have it because my engine is in FreePascal), here is my compile of the patch:

http://julien.marcel.free.fr/temp/confi ... hRybka.rar

to use it:
- rename ur original Rybka 1 beta win32 into "rptch9th.exe"
- place the patcher in the same directory as Rybka
- run the patcher (preferably from a shell so you can read the result of the patching).

[Rebel]

Patch is working now.

Quick 14 ply test again

Code: Select all

Rybka 1     Fruit   R1+patch
0:12        0:12     0:03
1:20        0:58     0:17
1:04        0:33     0:09 
0:42        0:32     0:08

Confirms depth obfuscation.

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

Part II - mainline obfuscation

**Bxg6 (ecm) - 0:02 (10)
r1b5/p2k1r1p/3P2pP/1ppR4/2P2p2/2P5/P1B4P/4R1K1 w - - 0 1

Analysis by Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit:

1.c4xb5
+- (1.67) Depth: 3 00:00:00
1.c4xb5
+- (1.73) Depth: 4 00:00:00
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7
+- (1.69) Depth: 5 00:00:00
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2
+- (1.47) Depth: 6 00:00:00 4kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 c5-c4
+- (1.77) Depth: 7 00:00:00 11kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 Ra8-e8 3.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 4.Bc2-b3
+- (1.86) Depth: 8 00:00:00 29kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 f4-f3 3.Kg1-f2 c5-c4
+- (1.89) Depth: 9 00:00:00 56kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 f4-f3 3.Kg1-f2 Ra8-e8 4.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 5.Bc2-b3
+- (2.08) Depth: 10 00:00:00 109kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 f4-f3 3.Kg1-f2 Ra8-e8 4.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 5.Rd1-e1+ Ke8-d8
+- (2.35) Depth: 11 00:00:01 281kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 Ra8-c8 3.Bc2-a4 Kd7-d8 4.Kg1-f2 Rf7-d7 5.Rd1-d2
+- (2.30) Depth: 12 00:00:02 456kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 Ra8-e8 3.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 4.Bc2-a4 f4-f3 5.Kg1-f2 Rf7-f4
+- (2.57) Depth: 13 00:00:05 1122kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 Bb7-f3 3.Rd1-d3 Bf3-g4 4.Bc2-a4 Ra8-f8 5.Ba4-b3 c5-c4
+- (3.32) Depth: 14 00:00:17 3556kN
1.c4xb5 Ra8-b8 2.Bc2-b3 Kd7-d8 3.Rd5xc5 Rf7-b7 4.Bb3-a4 Rb7-b6 5.Re1-e7 Rb8-b7

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

**Bxg6 (ecm) - 0:02 (10)
r1b5/p2k1r1p/3P2pP/1ppR4/2P2p2/2P5/P1B4P/4R1K1 w - - 0 1

Analysis by Rybka 1.0 Patch 32bit:

1.c4xb5
+- (1.79) Depth: 2 00:00:00
1.c4xb5
+- (1.79) Depth: 2 00:00:00
1.c4xb5
+- (1.45) Depth: 3 00:00:00
1.c4xb5
± (1.34) Depth: 4 00:00:00
1.c4xb5
+- (1.67) Depth: 5 00:00:00
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7
+- (1.69) Depth: 7 00:00:00 29kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7
+- (1.69) Depth: 7 00:00:00 29kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2
+- (1.47) Depth: 8 00:00:00 68kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 c5-c4
+- (1.77) Depth: 9 00:00:00 182kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 Ra8-e8 3.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 4.Bc2-b3
+- (1.86) Depth: 10 00:00:00 423kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 f4-f3 3.Kg1-f2 c5-c4
+- (1.89) Depth: 11 00:00:00 763kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d2 f4-f3 3.Kg1-f2 Ra8-e8 4.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 5.Bc2-b3
+- (2.08) Depth: 12 00:00:00 1400kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 f4-f3 3.Kg1-f2 Ra8-e8 4.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 5.Rd1-e1+ Ke8-d8
+- (2.35) Depth: 13 00:00:01 3400kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 Ra8-c8 3.Bc2-a4 Kd7-d8 4.Kg1-f2 Rf7-d7 5.Rd1-d2
+- (2.30) Depth: 14 00:00:02 5367kN
1.c4xb5 Bc8-b7 2.Rd5-d1 Ra8-e8 3.Re1xe8 Kd7xe8 4.Bc2-a4 f4-f3 5.Kg1-f2 Rf7-f4

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

I don't see a main-line obfuscation. Identical output.

Perhaps Rick Fadden never claimed main-line obfuscation, that's how understood it. Yet I have seen the accusation all over. Not that it matters much as it is was not an issue in the ICGA documents, only in the fora.

[Albert Silver]

I'm not saying that I don't think he tried to obfuscate the output or that he didn't lose the source code, those things are both very suspicious but I'm uncomfortable with making such an indirect inference.

Please try to argue this way about the evil agenda of Bob when he always metions a continual lying or such against Ed. How does he know anything about Ed's character or that of Vas?

I am certain that actually we hadnt this total split of two parties if from the beginning this debate about suspicions about copycoding would have been processed without any character assassination. I fight against it for many years. But apparently many here are being misleaden by Bob's overall fame, so any idea or suspicion from him must be the truth per se.

The truth is somewhere else but not with Bob alone!

I just don't see that Bob has an "evil" agenda. Sometimes Bob is too forceful or opinionated (as I can sometimes be too) which offends people who lack humility but he is basically a good guy. What would be his motivation for going after Vas? If it was for competitive reasons he would not publish his source code and be so helpful to anyone who asks questions and he doesn't make money from computer chess that I know of and even if he did how is Vas any kind of threat to him?

Well, over four years ago, he let it known that he considered Vas a hooligan and supported reverse-engineering Rybka to take his secrets to use in other programs.

I also support reverse engineering. How many times do we have to listen to the "Vas is innocent" camp try to make this silly juxtaposition that equates using an idea with outright code theft?

The truth of the matter is that computer chess ideas are NOT protected, they belong to everyone and nobody is claiming any differently.

You probably also realize that Bob is an open source guy and doesn't believe ideas should be held "secret" and I don't see any inconsistency here.

I think you need to figure out why Bob called Vas a hooligan - I'm sure it was not for using ideas from other programs since Crafty itself was designed as a vehicle to share ideas with the world.

Here is a quote, regarding Strelka, exactly 4 years to the day:

"I am completely unconcerned about the reverse-engineering that has been done. Seems like a fair way to "even the playing field" by forcing a secretive author to expose secrets... I'm not going to lose any sleep over this at all."

Robert Hyatt (Jan 14, 2008)

You are overlooking one very important detail.

Before Bob had made this declaration on Strelka and Rybka, he had also stated that the code published in Strelka looked clearly like someone had reverse-engineered AND copy-and-pasted that code as was. So this was not just in support of studying the ideas but in copying and pasting the code from Rybka.

[Rolf]

I'm not saying that I don't think he tried to obfuscate the output or that he didn't lose the source code, those things are both very suspicious but I'm uncomfortable with making such an indirect inference.

Please try to argue this way about the evil agenda of Bob when he always metions a continual lying or such against Ed. How does he know anything about Ed's character or that of Vas?

I am certain that actually we hadnt this total split of two parties if from the beginning this debate about suspicions about copycoding would have been processed without any character assassination. I fight against it for many years. But apparently many here are being misleaden by Bob's overall fame, so any idea or suspicion from him must be the truth per se.

The truth is somewhere else but not with Bob alone!

I just don't see that Bob has an "evil" agenda. Sometimes Bob is too forceful or opinionated (as I can sometimes be too) which offends people who lack humility but he is basically a good guy. What would be his motivation for going after Vas? If it was for competitive reasons he would not publish his source code and be so helpful to anyone who asks questions and he doesn't make money from computer chess that I know of and even if he did how is Vas any kind of threat to him?

Well, over four years ago, he let it known that he considered Vas a hooligan and supported reverse-engineering Rybka to take his secrets to use in other programs.

I also support reverse engineering. How many times do we have to listen to the "Vas is innocent" camp try to make this silly juxtaposition that equates using an idea with outright code theft?

The truth of the matter is that computer chess ideas are NOT protected, they belong to everyone and nobody is claiming any differently.

You probably also realize that Bob is an open source guy and doesn't believe ideas should be held "secret" and I don't see any inconsistency here.

I think you need to figure out why Bob called Vas a hooligan - I'm sure it was not for using ideas from other programs since Crafty itself was designed as a vehicle to share ideas with the world.

Here is a quote, regarding Strelka, exactly 4 years to the day:

"I am completely unconcerned about the reverse-engineering that has been done. Seems like a fair way to "even the playing field" by forcing a secretive author to expose secrets... I'm not going to lose any sleep over this at all."

Robert Hyatt (Jan 14, 2008)

You are overlooking one very important detail.

Before Bob had made this declaration on Strelka and Rybka, he had also stated that the code published in Strelka looked clearly like someone had reverse-engineered AND copy-and-pasted that code as was. So this was not just in support of studying the ideas but in copying and pasting the code from Rybka.

Know what? How can this happen, that a decent academic and scientist and doyen of the American computerchess is the protege at the same time of ethics if he has the minute of character assassination of Vas and the next moment he's on applauding if some dubious unknown stole and published Rybka code so that everybody now is using the stuff in his own program, like Don & Larry with Kommodo?

All those are allegedly allowed to do "it", but Vas was singled out and made the scapegoat for a yearlong hate campaign.

Where is the ethics exactly in which name the damage has been done by allegedly honest people?

We have a Free Will as long as we are sane in our minds, so please let's consider the mess and its inconsistencies and let's stop all the hate. Life is too short to be wasted with such hanky panky. Everyone gives the order to himself that now it's about PEACE! Yes, we can!

GENS UNA SUMUS

[wgarvin]

Know what? How can this happen, that a decent academic and scientist and doyen of the American computerchess is the protege at the same time of ethics if he has the minute of character assassination of Vas and the next moment he's on applauding if some dubious unknown stole and published Rybka code so that everybody now is using the stuff in his own program, like Don & Larry with Kommodo?

All those are allegedly allowed to do "it", but Vas was singled out and made the scapegoat for a yearlong hate campaign.

Where is the ethics exactly in which name the damage has been done by allegedly honest people?

We have a Free Will as long as we are sane in our minds, so please let's consider the mess and its inconsistencies and let's stop all the hate. Life is too short to be wasted with such hanky panky. Everyone gives the order to himself that now it's about PEACE! Yes, we can!

GENS UNA SUMUS

Yeah, yeah, peace. If you guys want to talk about character assassination...

Why don't you stop trying to blame Bob Hyatt for all of the trouble Vas got himself into? Sure Bob argues forcefully at times, but he doesn't twist the facts to try and mislead people, as some of the prominent Vas/Rybka supporters do over and over.

Vas is no scapegoat. Vas copied code from Crafty (verbatim) and later from Fruit 2.1. He violated Hyatt's and Letouzey's licenses. He entered the WCCC for several years with the CLAIM that Rybka was entirely his own original work--which is now known to be false. He cheated and had an unfair advantage over the other tournament entrants, for years. But he got caught. Then he ignored all of the evidence and accusations, hoping they would go away. He refused to defend himself, and that's why he got a lifetime ban (a harsher penalty than even the Secretariat's report had recommended, by the way).

Now Vas has an army of clueless defenders who try to find some excuse, any excuse, to justify his transgressions. Even by blaming his victims. The only "year-long campaign of hate" I'm aware of is the one you guys have been waging against Bob Hyatt.

Nobody hates Vas. Nobody on the panel had some pre-set objective to lynch him. We all looked at the evidence with a critical eye and found it to be quite strong. Its virtually certain that Vas did copy significant chunks of Fruit, such as almost the entire eval. Sure he tuned the weights in it, and sure he did lots of further work to improve Rybka in many ways, but it was NOT entirely his own work. These facts are not even in dispute -- Vas was given several chances to dispute them, and did not bother.

His appeal in the court of public opinion is not going to succeed. Everybody who cares about this scandal formed their opinion about it 6 months ago and nothing is going to change them. It just pains me that so many people formed the wrong opinion that Vas is somehow the innocent victim here. Nothing could be further from the truth--the situation today is a direct result of Rajlich's own actions, and his refusal to acknowledge or try to explain those actions after he got caught and it was proven that he had copied critical chunks of first Crafty, and later Fruit into his own engine.

[dj]

wgarvin wrote:

We all looked at the evidence with a critical eye and found it to be quite strong. Its virtually certain that Vas did copy significant chunks of Fruit, such as almost the entire eval. Sure he tuned the weights in it, and sure he did lots of further work to improve Rybka in many ways, but it was NOT entirely his own work. These facts are not even in dispute -- Vas was given several chances to dispute them, and did not bother.

...It just pains me that so many people formed the wrong opinion that Vas is somehow the innocent victim here. Nothing could be further from the truth--the situation today is a direct result of Rajlich's own actions, and his refusal to acknowledge or try to explain those actions after he got caught and it was proven that he had copied critical chunks of first Crafty, and later Fruit into his own engine.

This is typical of such much of the combination of bluster, arrogance and innuendo that characterizes the anti-Rajlich brigade.

You start with an assertion that the evidence against Rajlich is "quite strong". Not "certain" or "proved" but merely quite strong. You then thrash around and in the next sentence decide to use the stronger phrase "virtually certain", which is still a very long way from proof. You then ackowledge Rajlich's great advances (something not done by many of Rajlich's detractors) but go on to declare that certain facts are not in dispute and along with most Rajlich opponents you immediately seek to justify that with the words "Vas was given several chances to dispute them, and did not bother", i.e. he must be guilty by definition. No. No. No. Rajlich may have had all sorts of reasons for not involving himself in the process (including perhaps the belief that it was a witchhunt or possibly a belief that he did not have to justify himself to inferior programmers) but whatever his reasons nothing can be adduced from his silence. It is a fundamental principle of law (legal and moral) that a defendant does NOT have to prove himself innocent: it is up to the prosecution to provide evidence beyond any reasonable doubt, and not to come up with things you descrtibe as "quite strong".

You then indlulge in the typical arrogance of group that acted as the prosecution/judge/jury by writing that it "pains" you that "so many people formed the wrong opinion" where the arrogant "wrong opinion" should have been replaced with the neutral "opinion differing from my own".

Finally, after starting with evidence that is merely "quite stong" and "virtually certain" you decide to go the whole hog and declare Rajlich guilty and to use the word "proven":

after he got caught and it was proven

As I say, a dog's dinner of bluster, innuendos, maybes, perhaps, definite, proven etc in a post that a lawyer would find risible and which will convince no neutrals here.

[dj]

I'm not saying that I don't think he tried to obfuscate the output or that he didn't lose the source code, those things are both very suspicious but I'm uncomfortable with making such an indirect inference.

Please try to argue this way about the evil agenda of Bob when he always metions a continual lying or such against Ed. How does he know anything about Ed's character or that of Vas?

I am certain that actually we hadnt this total split of two parties if from the beginning this debate about suspicions about copycoding would have been processed without any character assassination. I fight against it for many years. But apparently many here are being misleaden by Bob's overall fame, so any idea or suspicion from him must be the truth per se.

The truth is somewhere else but not with Bob alone!

I just don't see that Bob has an "evil" agenda. Sometimes Bob is too forceful or opinionated (as I can sometimes be too) which offends people who lack humility but he is basically a good guy. What would be his motivation for going after Vas? If it was for competitive reasons he would not publish his source code and be so helpful to anyone who asks questions and he doesn't make money from computer chess that I know of and even if he did how is Vas any kind of threat to him?

Well, over four years ago, he let it known that he considered Vas a hooligan and supported reverse-engineering Rybka to take his secrets to use in other programs.

I also support reverse engineering. How many times do we have to listen to the "Vas is innocent" camp try to make this silly juxtaposition that equates using an idea with outright code theft?

The truth of the matter is that computer chess ideas are NOT protected, they belong to everyone and nobody is claiming any differently.

You probably also realize that Bob is an open source guy and doesn't believe ideas should be held "secret" and I don't see any inconsistency here.

I think you need to figure out why Bob called Vas a hooligan - I'm sure it was not for using ideas from other programs since Crafty itself was designed as a vehicle to share ideas with the world.

Here is a quote, regarding Strelka, exactly 4 years to the day:

"I am completely unconcerned about the reverse-engineering that has been done. Seems like a fair way to "even the playing field" by forcing a secretive author to expose secrets... I'm not going to lose any sleep over this at all."

Robert Hyatt (Jan 14, 2008)

You are overlooking one very important detail.

Before Bob had made this declaration on Strelka and Rybka, he had also stated that the code published in Strelka looked clearly like someone had reverse-engineered AND copy-and-pasted that code as was. So this was not just in support of studying the ideas but in copying and pasting the code from Rybka.

Know what? How can this happen, that a decent academic and scientist and doyen of the American computerchess is the protege at the same time of ethics if he has the minute of character assassination of Vas and the next moment he's on applauding if some dubious unknown stole and published Rybka code so that everybody now is using the stuff in his own program, like Don & Larry with Kommodo?

All those are allegedly allowed to do "it", but Vas was singled out and made the scapegoat for a yearlong hate campaign.

Where is the ethics exactly in which name the damage has been done by allegedly honest people?

We have a Free Will as long as we are sane in our minds, so please let's consider the mess and its inconsistencies and let's stop all the hate. Life is too short to be wasted with such hanky panky. Everyone gives the order to himself that now it's about PEACE! Yes, we can!

GENS UNA SUMUS

Hi Rolf,

Your English is immeasurably better than it was in your days on CTF. Did you take lessons? Anyway, congratulations on the improvement.

Derek

[wgarvin]

wgarvin wrote:

We all looked at the evidence with a critical eye and found it to be quite strong. Its virtually certain that Vas did copy significant chunks of Fruit, such as almost the entire eval. Sure he tuned the weights in it, and sure he did lots of further work to improve Rybka in many ways, but it was NOT entirely his own work. These facts are not even in dispute -- Vas was given several chances to dispute them, and did not bother.

...It just pains me that so many people formed the wrong opinion that Vas is somehow the innocent victim here. Nothing could be further from the truth--the situation today is a direct result of Rajlich's own actions, and his refusal to acknowledge or try to explain those actions after he got caught and it was proven that he had copied critical chunks of first Crafty, and later Fruit into his own engine.

This is typical of such much of the combination of bluster, arrogance and innuendo that characterizes the anti-Rajlich brigade.

You start with an assertion that the evidence against Rajlich is "quite strong". Not "certain" or "proved" but merely quite strong. You then thrash around and in the next sentence decide to use the stronger phrase "virtually certain", which is still a very long way from proof.

Have you ever been involved in a civil lawsuit? The standard of proof there is "balance of probabilities", in other words, "more likely to be guilty than to be innocent" (50% chance). The evidence against Vas is much stronger than that. I said "virtually certain" because that's how strong the evidence is: it shows at least a 99.99% chance that he's guilty.

You then ackowledge Rajlich's great advances (something not done by many of Rajlich's detractors) but go on to declare that certain facts are not in dispute and along with most Rajlich opponents you immediately seek to justify that with the words "Vas was given several chances to dispute them, and did not bother", i.e. he must be guilty by definition. No. No. No. Rajlich may have had all sorts of reasons for not involving himself in the process (including perhaps the belief that it was a witchhunt or possibly a belief that he did not have to justify himself to inferior programmers) but whatever his reasons nothing can be adduced from his silence.

Bullshit. Who cares why he didn't involve himself in the process. He was participating in ICGA tournaments, under ICGA rules, and got caught cheating. His ICGA titles were revoked by the ICGA Board, which also banned him from participating in any future ICGA tournaments. The ICGA is not a criminal court, its basically an international social club for chess programmers! His refusal to defend himself should absolutely be held against him when deciding if he should be allowed to participate in any more ICGA tournaments. He won't play by their rules, he won't even talk to them when there are serious accusations of cheating against him, accompanied by substantial amounts of very solid evidence. Of course they kicked him out!

It is a fundamental principle of law (legal and moral) that a defendant does NOT have to prove himself innocent: it is up to the prosecution to provide evidence beyond any reasonable doubt, and not to come up with things you descrtibe as "quite strong".

This is actually NOT TRUE for any kind of civil legal cases. It's only true for CRIMINAL cases, which involve serious crimes where the case is being prosecuted by the government. As far as we know, Vas didn't rape or murder anybody in the creation of Rybka.

But anyways, your "fundamental principle of law" is also irrelevant because the ICGA is not a court of law, its a private club/sports organization. Frankly, it can do whatever it wants. When the evidence surfaced, lots of members wanted the Fruit-Rybka situation investigated. So that was done, and the result was a clear picture of misbehaviour by Vas. He had a lot to answer for, but he hid himself away instead and ignored the repeated attempts to get his input. Instead, for the last 8 months, he's let his rabid fanboys (of which you and Rolf appear to be prime examples) fight his battles for him. But the main event is already over, the ICGA made its decision over 6 months ago and nothing is going to change it.

You then indlulge in the typical arrogance of group that acted as the prosecution/judge/jury by writing that it "pains" you that "so many people formed the wrong opinion" where the arrogant "wrong opinion" should have been replaced with the neutral "opinion differing from my own".

Hey, don't be an asshole, Derek. I wasn't indulging in any arrogance when I wrote that. I wrote it because its the truth. Everyone here on talkchess has opinions about this scandal, but most of those opinions are worthless because the people who hold them don't have a fucking clue what happened because they either haven't read the evidence, aren't qualified to understand it, or (in a few pathetic cases) refuse to believe it and are now wilfully misrepresenting the facts of the case in an effort to persuade impressionable others to adopt their misguided point of view.

Okay, now you may accuse me of "typical arrogance". I'm really sick of reading the trollish bullshit you guys heap up on a near-daily basis. If people who don't know what they're talking about would just keep their damn mouths shut, the Internet would be a much nicer place.

Finally, after starting with evidence that is merely "quite stong" and "virtually certain" you decide to go the whole hog and declare Rajlich guilty and to use the word "proven":

after he got caught and it was proven

As I say, a dog's dinner of bluster, innuendos, maybes, perhaps, definite, proven etc in a post that a lawyer would find risible and which will convince no neutrals here.

By "proven" I meant that the ICGA Board, after receiving the report of the ICGA Panel, concluded that Vas had broke Rule 2. They made their ruling, so that is the reality now and forever about this issue. Occam's Razor, dude. If there was some (highly improbable) scenario in which Vas was innocent, he should have come forward and explained it. Too late now, the Board ruled against him and now it's all over and done with.

I don't believe there are any "neutrals" left in the computer chess community. There are only (1) people who read the evidence and understand the truth, (2) people who fanatically refuse to abandon Vas, and (3) people who are sick to death of the whole story and wish we could all just move on. As I said already: Everyone who cares about this issue has already made up their minds, and will justify their opinions however they want. No one who is susceptible to logic still believes Vas is innocent, so I'm not trying to convince anybody here. I'm just asking the trolls (such as yourself) to please shut up for a while. Thanks.

[Rolf]

Your English is immeasurably better than it was in your days on CTF. Did you take lessons? Anyway, congratulations on the improvement.

Derek

Nice to see you, Derek. Unfortunately I cannot thank you for the compliments because this isnt true. My English didnt change for the last 60 years after school.

The explanation is easy as follows. Since the main science stuff was all in English I have a better situation if the narrowness of possible questions defines the quantity of vocabulary. While in political topics and such I have too many ideas but less valuable speech which leads you to the impression that then I am talking less well. Another handicap is the age because I cannot take all politics too seriously but I have no speech for sarcasms at all. For example I simply dont have all the foulty terms this Garvin here was using. In German I could easily make him speechless with his crap but in English he has such elegant expressions I just cant react to.

From my science I know 100% sure that this member is talking nonsense and he puts Vas down although Vas is completely innocent. Innocent in the light of the accusations.

This guy is so naive that he argues the terms stealing, cheating had no criminal content which indeed they have. Also character assassination isnt the less criminal.

The basic that a defendant must not prove himself innocent is valid in all justice not just in murder ot such.

Nice guy this Garvin. Interesting also in the light of the charter here. He had nothing but exteemely violent insults against you. I thought that this was forbidden here.

I am certain that Vas will be shown innocent after most facts and their context will becone fully known.

The whole panel investigation is scientifical crap.

I dont know if you already have taken a look, but please read for yourself e.g. what a sad role Mark Lefler is playing in the debates over there with Vas and Jeroen and others. And he is allegedly the spokesman for the programmers from the panel...

The art of their showing similarity of the two source codes in Fruit and Rybka, basically where Zach was involved is mega crap. Because they invented things that allowed them to prove similarity with their technique. But basically it all a hoax. And Zach has given years of his life for such a bull.

It's all so dirty. But if this will become understood the madness will finally end.

All the best to you till later in CTF sometime after the Palestinians will have their State. Please read between the lines because it's impossible to elaborate this further here.

A last detail, Keith from CTF was in RF these weeks. Have you any idea why this has happened?

[K I Hyams]

A last detail, Keith from CTF was in RF these weeks. Have you any idea why this has happened?

Quite simple really, Rolf. I wanted to take the opportunity to make sycophantic small-talk with my hero, Rajlich. By the way, your anodyne (pain killing) injection into my conversation with him was quite amusing.