I believe that the vast majority of members here would have no interest in using an illegal clone of Rybka. however, claiming engine x is an illegal clone, without providing evidence to back the up claim, does nobody any favours. If there is clear evidence, then surely it is in everyones interest to see that evidence alongside the clone claim.Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:Vas has the possibility to make a statement about it.Anton wrote: If there is clear evidence that Ippolit is a clone, then keeping quiet is only harming Vas's sales. there have been 200 downloads in the last 24 hours from Tony Thomas chess site, so keeping quiet in order to "make people look fools" is also hurting Vas's pocket.
It's been pointed out several times the software in question is illegal, so if people are still downloading it, I don't think they care for anyones opinion anyway. However, site owners have to remove the download after being notified it's illegal.
About Clones or Supposed Clones
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 3549
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:53 pm
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
-
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:00 pm
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
Emphasis mine.If there is clear evidence, then surely it is in everyones interest to see that evidence alongside the clone claim.
-
- Posts: 267
- Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:01 am
- Location: Russia
- Full name: Vladimir Medvedev
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
Заседание продолжается, господа присяжные заседатели!
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:08 pm
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
Actually, another person who could help determine if it is a clone is Larry Kaufman, sinc ehe helped tune the evaluation function. He could look at thinks like piece values, PST values, mobility terms, etc that he helped adjust and see if they match what he found in his work.Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Indeed,the source is out there and Vas is the only person who can confirm if this particular engine is a clone or not as he has the source code of Rybka....of course other clones hunters,hello Chris ,are most welcomed to share their opinion as they had saved us a lot of testing fake engines appearing out of the blue....Anton wrote:I agree that the above names only serve to increase suspicion that we are looking at a clone, yet the names alone are not evidence of a clone.Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:Yes, particularly Yakov Petrovich Golyadkin (a novel personage) and Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (Russian head of state) and Roberto Pescatore (might be real, but the familiy name means "fisherman"!) could be terribly insulted by the accusation that they are not the real authors.Anton wrote:a potentially innocent programmer.
Has Vas been made aware of these source codes? I look forward to hearing his verdict in this matter.
No again,Vas has the definite word here....
Dr.D
-
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:10 pm
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
The stolen software mentioned is not complete. It is missing a large part of the code that has been left out or still not disassembled yet. The evaluation functions uses tables that seem to be missing, most likely because the person who stole the code still doesn't know how that works or doesn't have parts of the code that can make that work. I seriously doubt this program is as robust as some have claim, or that it is even 50 ELO stronger than Rybka 3 as some have claimed. Even if it was an exact copy of Rybka 3 and the few simple well documented bugs have been fixed, the improvement would probably be less than 20 ELO. Maybe not having some of the protection code might add an extra few ELO, but still noway near 50 ELO. You can get an improvement against an identical Rybka 3 on identical hardware by simply changing the default contempt factor, especially in very fast games ... but again that is just an illusion of a stronger engine.
-
- Posts: 6073
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:34 pm
- Location: Scotland
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
I cannot disagree with anything you have said. It is glaringly obvious that the code has significant parts missing.M ANSARI wrote:The stolen software mentioned is not complete. It is missing a large part of the code that has been left out or still not disassembled yet. The evaluation functions uses tables that seem to be missing, most likely because the person who stole the code still doesn't know how that works or doesn't have parts of the code that can make that work. I seriously doubt this program is as robust as some have claim, or that it is even 50 ELO stronger than Rybka 3 as some have claimed. Even if it was an exact copy of Rybka 3 and the few simple well documented bugs have been fixed, the improvement would probably be less than 20 ELO. Maybe not having some of the protection code might add an extra few ELO, but still noway near 50 ELO. You can get an improvement against an identical Rybka 3 on identical hardware by simply changing the default contempt factor, especially in very fast games ... but again that is just an illusion of a stronger engine.
Christopher
-
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:00 pm
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
Correct. Like Strelka, it appears the gaps have been filled in with parts from other programs.M ANSARI wrote:The stolen software mentioned is not complete. It is missing a large part of the code that has been left out or still not disassembled yet.
For example, the original Rybka 3 uses 10 bit in the hash entries to store scores. This is very obvious if you play with it and some users have complained about this "5.12 bug". The source code that was posted does not seem to have the same TT implementation, it is much closer to Fruit.
Another reason that the tables might be missing is that their presence would make it much more obvious the code is stolen. (In Strelka, it was a dead giveaway)The evaluation functions uses tables that seem to be missing, most likely because the person who stole the code still doesn't know how that works or doesn't have parts of the code that can make that work.
-
- Posts: 16465
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:16 am
- Location: Canada
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
Stupid Argument!WinPooh wrote:Google is illegal. It gives the link in question on the first place for query with two words. The first one is <censored>, the second one is "chess".Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:Linking to illegal software is illegal.
Google is a mindless but well ordered search engine with deep search capabilities that will find just about anything on the internet.
Google isn't held libel for bad links of any kind. Of course the perpetrators can be.
ICD On the other hand is libel for linking to illegal sites that can harm business. They become accessories to the crime.
You live in a country where illegal activity is a way of life at the highest level. No wonder you can't see the problem.
Terry McCracken
-
- Posts: 16465
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:16 am
- Location: Canada
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
Russia has little understanding of what justice actually means.WinPooh wrote:
Заседание продолжается, господа присяжные заседатели!
Terry McCracken
-
- Posts: 9773
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
- Location: Amman,Jordan
Re: About Clones or Supposed Clones
WinPooh wrote:
Заседание продолжается, господа присяжные заседатели!
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….