Christophe, Zach and Norman? Made a Promise- I Want It

[Alexander Schmidt]

Bored?

[bob]

So let's get off this bad analogy approach unless you can choose an analogy that actually supports your position rather than contradicts it.

It's my fault that you missed the main point I made. Therefore just for completeness reasons. You are repeating the same output, the moves and such but my example meant this: following you it was the same, a copy or whatever term of your choice, but how could it be faster, in my example of the cars, and in chess 100 points better all of the time with rising version numbers? I'm only speaking about this surplus.
If it were so easy to at first begin with the copy then why many others arent doing the same? In my books that speaks clearly against your hypothesis that Rybka1beta was a copy. Then what is your final verdict? I measn, what relevance legally, justice, court, this what you see and claim does have?? Violations of past experiences? Into what category that crime belongs? We have never done this, this would be completely new... It will always insult masters of concrete/beton/past.

I don't see why you don't get this. You steal a super-secret high-performance engine, and then mount it in a better carbon-fiber chassis/body so that it now is faster than anything around. Partially because of the innovation of the carbon-fiber chassis, but also because of the stolen high-performance motor. Is this OK? Not in my mind. If you steal something and improve it, it is still stolen property...

Then what is with the almost 80% you all have stolen/taken from your forefathers?? And again, Vas didnt just once improve the performance on the base of the bitboard design but he does it with every new version. From where did he steal this? If not from his own genius!

Bob, guess is the best student you ever had, and better than yourself, cant you imagine a method in the field itself plus some ingenious marketing ideas, that Vas might have followed? That is the difference, Bob, where mere stealing is transforming into genius creativity. You speak of a secret that you would want to know. But then at first consider that Vas is really some improvement. Lay asks, could it be that a genial programmer could have introduced a sort of loop - invisible - that forces false output to rippers? IMO the secret doesnt lie in a concrete place, it's the overall design. Ok, now make some jokes about my ignorance.

Simple challenge. Take current crafty source, and find "80%" that matches up with any program source you can find. Then come back and ask your question. We are not talking about _ideas_. We are talking about source code. There is a world of difference. And btw, stealing is stealing. Whether you take the stolen item and turn it into a nobel prize or not doesn't affect the fact that it is stealing... This is not that complicated a concept. This is covered in most any computer ethics text book as well as in most any introductory "guide to professional ethics" that you are given at a research-oriented job...

[bob]

hahahahaha

oh well........ because of this brouhaha, you'll be sleeping like a baby.
(just as sen mccain said to jay leno/tonight show)

hahahahaha

hmmmmmm...........................

whatever, but i sense there is "chess programming" jealousy in the air.

If you smell something fishy, just take a bath and it will go away.

I sleep well every night, in fact. And it has nothing to do with computer chess whatsoever...

[chrisw]

So let's get off this bad analogy approach unless you can choose an analogy that actually supports your position rather than contradicts it.

It's my fault that you missed the main point I made. Therefore just for completeness reasons. You are repeating the same output, the moves and such but my example meant this: following you it was the same, a copy or whatever term of your choice, but how could it be faster, in my example of the cars, and in chess 100 points better all of the time with rising version numbers? I'm only speaking about this surplus.
If it were so easy to at first begin with the copy then why many others arent doing the same? In my books that speaks clearly against your hypothesis that Rybka1beta was a copy. Then what is your final verdict? I measn, what relevance legally, justice, court, this what you see and claim does have?? Violations of past experiences? Into what category that crime belongs? We have never done this, this would be completely new... It will always insult masters of concrete/beton/past.

I don't see why you don't get this. You steal a super-secret high-performance engine, and then mount it in a better carbon-fiber chassis/body so that it now is faster than anything around. Partially because of the innovation of the carbon-fiber chassis, but also because of the stolen high-performance motor. Is this OK? Not in my mind. If you steal something and improve it, it is still stolen property...

Then what is with the almost 80% you all have stolen/taken from your forefathers?? And again, Vas didnt just once improve the performance on the base of the bitboard design but he does it with every new version. From where did he steal this? If not from his own genius!

Bob, guess is the best student you ever had, and better than yourself, cant you imagine a method in the field itself plus some ingenious marketing ideas, that Vas might have followed? That is the difference, Bob, where mere stealing is transforming into genius creativity. You speak of a secret that you would want to know. But then at first consider that Vas is really some improvement. Lay asks, could it be that a genial programmer could have introduced a sort of loop - invisible - that forces false output to rippers? IMO the secret doesnt lie in a concrete place, it's the overall design. Ok, now make some jokes about my ignorance.

It's like a rowing boat, an eight or a four. You can put together the finest and latest lightweight sleek design, with superdesigned oars and rowlocks, perfect seating glide, the best oarsmen, the lightest cox and they'll be hopeless, because they are not practised, tuned and working as one - maybe even they don't fit together and never will.

Vas genius was to take the components of chess programming, mostly known, and work them together into a lean mean perfectly tuned machine. He took two and two and made five, that's his genius and that's what makes him stand head and shoulders above the opposition. The genius is in the overview, the design, the feel for what he is doing. The proof is in the performance. It's the failure to understand, let alone repeat, the genius of the overview that leads to the envy and the criticism.

What I like in particular is Vas completely relaxed attitude to the venom that is thrown at him. He has an understanding level above and beyond, so he can simply look down in resigned amusement.

Viva Vas and Viva Rybka.

[Michael Sherwin]

So let's get off this bad analogy approach unless you can choose an analogy that actually supports your position rather than contradicts it.

It's my fault that you missed the main point I made. Therefore just for completeness reasons. You are repeating the same output, the moves and such but my example meant this: following you it was the same, a copy or whatever term of your choice, but how could it be faster, in my example of the cars, and in chess 100 points better all of the time with rising version numbers? I'm only speaking about this surplus.
If it were so easy to at first begin with the copy then why many others arent doing the same? In my books that speaks clearly against your hypothesis that Rybka1beta was a copy. Then what is your final verdict? I measn, what relevance legally, justice, court, this what you see and claim does have?? Violations of past experiences? Into what category that crime belongs? We have never done this, this would be completely new... It will always insult masters of concrete/beton/past.

I don't see why you don't get this. You steal a super-secret high-performance engine, and then mount it in a better carbon-fiber chassis/body so that it now is faster than anything around. Partially because of the innovation of the carbon-fiber chassis, but also because of the stolen high-performance motor. Is this OK? Not in my mind. If you steal something and improve it, it is still stolen property...

Then what is with the almost 80% you all have stolen/taken from your forefathers?? And again, Vas didnt just once improve the performance on the base of the bitboard design but he does it with every new version. From where did he steal this? If not from his own genius!

Bob, guess is the best student you ever had, and better than yourself, cant you imagine a method in the field itself plus some ingenious marketing ideas, that Vas might have followed? That is the difference, Bob, where mere stealing is transforming into genius creativity. You speak of a secret that you would want to know. But then at first consider that Vas is really some improvement. Lay asks, could it be that a genial programmer could have introduced a sort of loop - invisible - that forces false output to rippers? IMO the secret doesnt lie in a concrete place, it's the overall design. Ok, now make some jokes about my ignorance.

It's like a rowing boat, an eight or a four. You can put together the finest and latest lightweight sleek design, with superdesigned oars and rowlocks, perfect seating glide, the best oarsmen, the lightest cox and they'll be hopeless, because they are not practised, tuned and working as one - maybe even they don't fit together and never will.

Vas genius was to take the components of chess programming, mostly known, and work them together into a lean mean perfectly tuned machine. He took two and two and made five, that's his genius and that's what makes him stand head and shoulders above the opposition. The genius is in the overview, the design, the feel for what he is doing. The proof is in the performance. It's the failure to understand, let alone repeat, the genius of the overview that leads to the envy and the criticism.

What I like in particular is Vas completely relaxed attitude to the venom that is thrown at him. He has an understanding level above and beyond, so he can simply look down in resigned amusement.

Viva Vas and Viva Rybka.

And I would add that the idea that Vas stole anything from Fruit is wrong. You can not steal what was given! GPL or no GPL, Fabien published his ideas for all to use. It looks as though Vas may have used some framework code from Fruit (and maybe some constants that were probably, "best by test"), but that is mundane and nobody should care. The engine itself is a complete rewrite and shares no code with the original. And it is Vastly improved.

[M ANSARI]

So let's get off this bad analogy approach unless you can choose an analogy that actually supports your position rather than contradicts it.

It's my fault that you missed the main point I made. Therefore just for completeness reasons. You are repeating the same output, the moves and such but my example meant this: following you it was the same, a copy or whatever term of your choice, but how could it be faster, in my example of the cars, and in chess 100 points better all of the time with rising version numbers? I'm only speaking about this surplus.
If it were so easy to at first begin with the copy then why many others arent doing the same? In my books that speaks clearly against your hypothesis that Rybka1beta was a copy. Then what is your final verdict? I measn, what relevance legally, justice, court, this what you see and claim does have?? Violations of past experiences? Into what category that crime belongs? We have never done this, this would be completely new... It will always insult masters of concrete/beton/past.

I don't see why you don't get this. You steal a super-secret high-performance engine, and then mount it in a better carbon-fiber chassis/body so that it now is faster than anything around. Partially because of the innovation of the carbon-fiber chassis, but also because of the stolen high-performance motor. Is this OK? Not in my mind. If you steal something and improve it, it is still stolen property...

Then what is with the almost 80% you all have stolen/taken from your forefathers?? And again, Vas didnt just once improve the performance on the base of the bitboard design but he does it with every new version. From where did he steal this? If not from his own genius!

Bob, guess is the best student you ever had, and better than yourself, cant you imagine a method in the field itself plus some ingenious marketing ideas, that Vas might have followed? That is the difference, Bob, where mere stealing is transforming into genius creativity. You speak of a secret that you would want to know. But then at first consider that Vas is really some improvement. Lay asks, could it be that a genial programmer could have introduced a sort of loop - invisible - that forces false output to rippers? IMO the secret doesnt lie in a concrete place, it's the overall design. Ok, now make some jokes about my ignorance.

It's like a rowing boat, an eight or a four. You can put together the finest and latest lightweight sleek design, with superdesigned oars and rowlocks, perfect seating glide, the best oarsmen, the lightest cox and they'll be hopeless, because they are not practised, tuned and working as one - maybe even they don't fit together and never will.

Vas genius was to take the components of chess programming, mostly known, and work them together into a lean mean perfectly tuned machine. He took two and two and made five, that's his genius and that's what makes him stand head and shoulders above the opposition. The genius is in the overview, the design, the feel for what he is doing. The proof is in the performance. It's the failure to understand, let alone repeat, the genius of the overview that leads to the envy and the criticism.

What I like in particular is Vas completely relaxed attitude to the venom that is thrown at him. He has an understanding level above and beyond, so he can simply look down in resigned amusement.

Viva Vas and Viva Rybka.

I agree ... Vas has shown tremendous class by not getting into this mud slinging.

[mhull]

It's like a rowing boat, an eight or a four.

Or trolling in a boat.

You can put together the finest and latest lightweight sleek design, with superdesigned oars and rowlocks, perfect seating glide, the best oarsmen, the lightest cox and they'll be hopeless, because they are not practised, tuned and working as one - maybe even they don't fit together and never will.

For example, Checkmate - The Final Word in Chess.

...It's the failure to understand, let alone repeat, the genius of the overview that leads to the envy and the criticism. He has an understanding level above and beyond, so he can simply look down in resigned amusement.

Understanding above and beyond, as in splitting at the root on a cluster.

[bob]

It's like a rowing boat, an eight or a four.

Or trolling in a boat.

You can put together the finest and latest lightweight sleek design, with superdesigned oars and rowlocks, perfect seating glide, the best oarsmen, the lightest cox and they'll be hopeless, because they are not practised, tuned and working as one - maybe even they don't fit together and never will.

For example, Checkmate - The Final Word in Chess.

...It's the failure to understand, let alone repeat, the genius of the overview that leads to the envy and the criticism. He has an understanding level above and beyond, so he can simply look down in resigned amusement.

Understanding above and beyond, as in splitting at the root on a cluster.

Splitting at the root is an ok "first approximation" to a cluster-search. The only thing I don't like is the claim of +100 Elo from doing it. That is simply false. Splitting at the root might be a reasonable way of _starting_ a cluster search. That's not really an issue. But to get +100 Elo, you need to be in the 3x-4x faster range. On 5 nodes? Splitting at the root. Not possible. Not even in an alternate universe.

[dj]

Agreed. I have always found the suggestion that Vas has somehow "stolen" something from Fruit very odd. Vas himself has said that the original Rybka owed perhaps 10% or so to Fruit, but Fruit was open source and everybody took what they wanted from the program. Vas took what he thought appropriate and along with his many other sources of inspiration - internal and external - fashioned a program that was better than its contemporaries. He had neither more nor less access to Fruit than anybody else.

There are those who always want to knock those at the top. For example, some people want to attack ChessBase because it is the largest and most successful of the chess software companies. No doubt it has its faults but for some it seems an object of hatred primarily because it is so successful. Similarly many attack Microsoft - seemingly for no concrete reason other than that it is the top of the tree.

[Dann Corbit]

What Vas did with Rybka is perfectly fine. He made a better wiget--that is what us humans do--we make better wigets! Okay, he may have used a very good wiget as a base model, but then he used a better material for his wiget (bitboards) and made many improvements. His wiget is a far superior widget and he deserves the credit for his improved wiget!

My gripe is that Fruits source code was released in the first place. I wish that it hadn't been released. This is purely selfish as I believe that my program would have a substantially higher position in the rating list if Fruits sources hadn't been released and would be more important to people today than it is. The number of new/improved programs just skyrocketed after Fruit was released. My program though has not benifited from Fruits release as I have taken nothing from it or any other program except that I learned the basics from TSCP!

But, now my originality does not count for much and to even get close to the top, I must consider doing what Vas may have done!

Why don't you complain about the release of TSCP?

Miguel

You're joking right?

But, just in case you're not.

TSCP is only a very basic engine that was written as a teaching aid for dummies like me, so I could grasp the very rudiments of chess programming with out a whole bunch of perifery algorithms getting in the way. Any engine based on TSCP needs a huge amount of work to be a threat to any engine in the top 150 or so engines. There are plenty of books that give more information than TSCP gives.

I should complain about TSCP? Really?

I think that something else motivates your question!

I am glad we're not all still using bubble sort.
Somebody thought it was a good idea to teach us other ways to order data.

If chess competition has come to the point where winning and losing is the only important thing and learning new ideas should be punished then chess programming is going in entirely the wrong direction.