Daniel Shawul wrote:Isn't the programmer declaring that it is an original work, if he didn't mention sources in whatever copyright he used? Why should a programmer make such a solemn promise like witnesses in court room do? Well the defendants life depend on a testimony in court rooms. Most politicians screw us even though they make similar promises. The only "benefit" I see with the approach is to embarass him, "but you said it is pure", citing a source of claim. I don't see a reason to use such extreme measures when a human life is not involved (Doctors, captial punishment come to mind)
It is a Honor's Code, like in many other places. It is not for the people who read the signatures, it is more for the people who pledge it.
Miguel
I understand the intention but it maybe a little impractical because why would anyone risk doing that? If there is some kind of association where programmers who signed get some kind of benefit , then that will be a motivation. For instance, only those who signed may be allowed to participate in a prestigious tournament (e.g ICGA wcc but we know where that is at ). Also it is indirectly implied you are declaring so when you go to such torunaments in the first place, so I don't see anyone signing it when there is no clear benefit to the author. I don't disagree with the idea but question the practicality of it. There are some honor associations that I made such solemn promises (even though I don't remember what it is now), my motivation was that being a member helps in job search..
Daniel Shawul wrote:Isn't the programmer declaring that it is an original work, if he didn't mention sources in whatever copyright he used? Why should a programmer make such a solemn promise like witnesses in court room do? Well the defendants life depend on a testimony in court rooms. Most politicians screw us even though they make similar promises. The only "benefit" I see with the approach is to embarass him, "but you said it is pure", citing a source of claim. I don't see a reason to use such extreme measures when a human life is not involved (Doctors, captial punishment come to mind)
It is a Honor's Code, like in many other places. It is not for the people who read the signatures, it is more for the people who pledge it.
Miguel
I understand the intention but it maybe a little impractical because why would anyone risk doing that? If there is some kind of association where programmers who signed get some kind of benefit , then that will be a motivation. For instance, only those who signed may be allowed to participate in a prestigious tournament (e.g ICGA wcc but we know where that is at ). Also it is indirectly implied you are declaring so when you go to such torunaments in the first place, so I don't see anyone signing it when there is no clear benefit to the author. I don't disagree with the idea but question the practicality of it. There are some honor associations that I made such solemn promises (even though I don't remember what it is now), my motivation was that being a member helps in job search..
The advantage is in the support the initiative receives. When the list is long and impressive the wish to be on it increases. So there is a bit of emotional blackmail involved. But then again you are basically asked to keep the law of your country except for point 3 which is new and could be a bridge too far for some.
a) is an original work
b) is a derivative from xxxxx
I hereby solemnly promise:
1. Not to copy the work of other programmers without their express permission.
2. Not to RE the work of other programmers without their express permission.
3. When I use an idea I will mention the source in the README file.
Signature
----------------
Maintain a web-page of those who signed. I offer my space and time.
Ed why not create an organization instead, build a constitution and by-laws, with computer chess programmers' code of ethics.
Because:
- it takes time and money and a lot more involvement
- there is yet such an organization. It just need a bit of clean up.
- Kasparov tried and failed (hence my joke name for such a new association: PCCA).
a) is an original work
b) is a derivative from xxxxx
I hereby solemnly promise:
1. Not to copy the work of other programmers without their express permission.
2. Not to RE the work of other programmers without their express permission.
3. When I use an idea I will mention the source in the README file.
Signature
----------------
Maintain a web-page of those who signed. I offer my space and time.
Ed why not create an organization instead, build a constitution and by-laws, with computer chess programmers' code of ethics.
Because:
- it takes time and money and a lot more involvement
- there is yet such an organization. It just need a bit of clean up.
- Kasparov tried and failed (hence my joke name for such a new association: PCCA).
Start small not big. Focus on code of ethics, avoid activities that involve money if not minimize. Time should not be a problem this is not a contest of who finish first.
a) is an original work
b) is a derivative from xxxxx
I hereby solemnly promise:
1. Not to copy the work of other programmers without their express permission.
2. Not to RE the work of other programmers without their express permission.
3. When I use an idea I will mention the source in the README file.
Signature
----------------
Maintain a web-page of those who signed. I offer my space and time.
Ed why not create an organization instead, build a constitution and by-laws, with computer chess programmers' code of ethics.
Because:
- it takes time and money and a lot more involvement
- there is yet such an organization. It just need a bit of clean up.
- Kasparov tried and failed (hence my joke name for such a new association: PCCA).
Start small not big. Focus on code of ethics, avoid activities that involve money if not minimize. Time should not be a problem this is not a contest of who finish first.
Starting small and progressing, although being my own philosophy, contradicts modern trend promoted by the ICGA's opponents: build upon giants' shoulders So creating a new association would contradict their own philosophy. Besides, if each generation had to destroy everything the previous ones built think about what we'd get: 15 different world soccer federations, 5 UNO and so on.
No, that's not how adults deal with problems: they fight to correct what exists. For instance, it is clear now that David Levy doesn't have the confidence of a big part of the community. Maybe 1) time for him to step out, or 2) time for his opponents to organize themselves and chose someone to run against him during the next ICGA's elections?
(Doctors, captial punishment come to mind)
