Suj reached 37,000 kn/s with Rybka 3!

[bob]

Nice Censorship...

???

What did I miss???

[Terry McCracken]

Nice Censorship...

???

What did I miss???

Vincent made a claim that the assembler in Naum showed it was based on Rybka. He said three other programmers attested to this fact, including Vasik. Then Graham Banks protested along with Peter Skinner. Also, Graham said that your claims along with Christophe fell flat, that your allegations were baseless.

I summerized the facts about Rybka 1.0 Beta and Fruit.

All what Vincent wrote was deleted along with my post positing the facts about the Rybka-Fruit Incident.

The subject is taboo.

[Peter Skinner]

Nice Censorship...

???

What did I miss???

Vincent made a claim that the assembler in Naum showed it was based on Rybka. He said three other programmers attested to this fact, including Vasik. Then Graham Banks protested along with Peter Skinner. Also, Graham said that your claims along with Christophe fell flat, that your allegations were baseless.

I summerized the facts about Rybka 1.0 Beta and Fruit.

All what Vincent wrote was deleted along with my post positing the facts about the Rybka-Fruit Incident.

The subject is taboo.

Just because someone states this program is a clone or that program is a clone with no offered proof other than hearsay, doesn't make it real.

There was a sticky at the top of this forum related to accusing programs of being clones. Unless proof is supplied it would be removed.

Vincent claims that three programmers verified the claim that Naum was a clone of Rybka 2.3.2. Either he can get these people to post here to that effect, or take that crap elsewhere.

He stated Vas had the same results, so let him post to that effect.

I only protested because it was going to turn into a flame war that wasn't needed.

Peter

[bob]

Nice Censorship...

???

What did I miss???

Vincent made a claim that the assembler in Naum showed it was based on Rybka. He said three other programmers attested to this fact, including Vasik. Then Graham Banks protested along with Peter Skinner. Also, Graham said that your claims along with Christophe fell flat, that your allegations were baseless.

I summerized the facts about Rybka 1.0 Beta and Fruit.

All what Vincent wrote was deleted along with my post positing the facts about the Rybka-Fruit Incident.

The subject is taboo.

Here's my take on this. CCC was founded as a place to discuss computer chess issues. And "clones" are a legitimate issue since we have had so many of them over the past 15 years. This is the _perfect_ place to discuss such topics. If anyone wants to go join a tea party with little old ladies, feel free. Here we ought to be able to discuss clone issues freely and openly. Too many are all about censorship above everything else...

Unfortunately, the very ones demanding censorship are the very ones that are not qualified to take part in the discussions at hand...

[bob]

Nice Censorship...

???

What did I miss???

Vincent made a claim that the assembler in Naum showed it was based on Rybka. He said three other programmers attested to this fact, including Vasik. Then Graham Banks protested along with Peter Skinner. Also, Graham said that your claims along with Christophe fell flat, that your allegations were baseless.

I summerized the facts about Rybka 1.0 Beta and Fruit.

All what Vincent wrote was deleted along with my post positing the facts about the Rybka-Fruit Incident.

The subject is taboo.

Just because someone states this program is a clone or that program is a clone with no offered proof other than hearsay, doesn't make it real.

There was a sticky at the top of this forum related to accusing programs of being clones. Unless proof is supplied it would be removed.

Vincent claims that three programmers verified the claim that Naum was a clone of Rybka 2.3.2. Either he can get these people to post here to that effect, or take that crap elsewhere.

He stated Vas had the same results, so let him post to that effect.

I only protested because it was going to turn into a flame war that wasn't needed.

Peter

This logic is _badly_ flawed. You are basically saying that you can't take a case to court, until you have _already_ proven the verdict beforehand. And that is unreasonable. CCC is the ideal place to discuss these issues, as there is enough technical expertise here to look at them and reach a conclusion.

If you want absolute proof, then all clones are legal. One can prove that it is possible, by pure chance, to produce the _identical_ binary executable as someone else's program. Because the algorithm to do so is a 10 line program. Might run a _long_ time. But I can prove it can be done, which means there will _never_ be absolute proof that A is a clone of B. But most court trials don't have absolute proof either, they discuss evidence and let jurors use their judgement to determine guilt or innocence. Absolute proof is extremely rare, and requiring it here before a discussion can even start simply means the topic can never be discussed.

That makes absolutely no sense...

Where there is smoke, there is usually fire. It is _much_ wiser to call the fire department when you first smell smoke, rather than waiting until you see the flames. Using the logic proposed here, one's house has to first burn down, before you can call the fire department to attempt to save it, because it might not really be going to burn down...

What's the point in that???

[Graham Banks]

Here's my take on this. CCC was founded as a place to discuss computer chess issues. And "clones" are a legitimate issue since we have had so many of them over the past 15 years. This is the _perfect_ place to discuss such topics. If anyone wants to go join a tea party with little old ladies, feel free. Here we ought to be able to discuss clone issues freely and openly. Too many are all about censorship above everything else...

Unfortunately, the very ones demanding censorship are the very ones that are not qualified to take part in the discussions at hand...

Be aware that Terry took some liberties in reporting what had happened.
I reported the post, but somebody else had already beaten me too it. Peter and myself weren't the only members who complained.
I also never mentioned you by name anywhere in my posts.
Besides, the charter prohibits posts of questionable legal status plus libellous attacks, does it not?

Regards, Graham.

[M ANSARI]

I am trying to figure out what it was in MY post that warranted a deletion?

[Terry McCracken]

Here's my take on this. CCC was founded as a place to discuss computer chess issues. And "clones" are a legitimate issue since we have had so many of them over the past 15 years. This is the _perfect_ place to discuss such topics. If anyone wants to go join a tea party with little old ladies, feel free. Here we ought to be able to discuss clone issues freely and openly. Too many are all about censorship above everything else...

Unfortunately, the very ones demanding censorship are the very ones that are not qualified to take part in the discussions at hand...

Be aware that Terry took some liberties in reporting what had happened.
I reported the post, but somebody else had already beaten me too it. Peter and myself weren't the only members who complained.
I also never mentioned you by name anywhere in my posts.
Besides, the charter prohibits posts of questionable legal status plus libellous attacks, does it not?

Regards, Graham.

Taking liberties? Nonsense! You stated that the case against Rybka fell flat and the people behind those accusations have produced nothing! We all know who those people were and are!

If people reported my post then they should find another hobby, including you!

[terminator]

I think this post is WAYYY OFF TOPIC and should be locked.

1. What does Naum have to do with a bogus 37,000 kn/s Rybka claim?

2. There are many kids on the chat at places like ICC and Playchess. We would fill the forums with junk if we wanted to discuss the many useless and unsubstantiated claims made.

3. Perhaps a "teenage CCC" can be opened so that "discussions" like this post can be relegated there and can attract 13 year old chess players who want to claim they have 512 cores on Windows X 256 bit?

[Terry McCracken]

I am trying to figure out what it was in MY post that warranted a deletion?

It didn't. It was just removed without thought.