To be or not to be.............a clone in the 3-rd millenium

[Sylwy]

Hello Sirs !

After a lot of dramatic days & nigths on some important international computer chess forums , after a lot of tests carried on in legal/semilegal/illegal conditions (varying with meantime zone , country and regime ), after a lot of interdiction to name this strong buggy baby boy ( I see [deleted],xxxxxxx,IPP,unnamed,named.....& so on ) , after hearing the dramatic conditions in which was discovered this orphan on the 6-th of May 2009 aJ.Ch. cast-off somewhere on a web page ( only a presumptive russophone father ) , hearing how was sudied & dissected this baby by some titans in computer ches programmation ,reading the revolutionary slogans in Russian & Spanish in which was bathed this baby,reading a short and ambiguous declaration of the leader Vas , presuming an imminent increase in strength of some commercial chess engines.......................I'm awfully confused.
Is this ( I don't know how to name this young creature-sorry ) a clone or not ?
Reading today a professor how can be this unnamed a true well assorted compote ( parts from Fruit, Toga, Crafty, Strelka,Rybka,Stockfish,Naum....) I was ready to eat one of my computer.
The tragedy was averted but the problem remains.
Please help me !
Yours devoted,
Silvian

PS: have-all-a nice weekend

[solis]

Hi Silvian,
great stuff but here is the problem;

"the moderation team has made its position known on this early on when the first thread regarding the engine reared its head"

What we have here is modern day "intellectual " inquisition where few people decide for the entire chess community what we can or can not use.Since some of them are so fond of bashing old commies from Russia they can not see that they have reaches or even surpassed the intellectual terror they are so ready to criticize .
From their comments one can see that they have the engine in different versions but this is only for them.The light stays with them but the masses have to live in the dark.
Well, the engine is still circulating and people are using and sharing it.So that they can no stop.
I am surprised in that quote they did not say "the engine reared its ugly head".Whatever monster they think this engine is after seeing it destroying Rybka and Shredder I thought it was beautiful.
So far how many people have analyzed and dissected this engine and they could not say for sure is it clone or not.But the "moderation team" has decided:guilty without proving anything.And the rest has to accept they verdict.
According to them if somebody would like to produce new car he would have to reinvent the wheels again.And than they would judge if this wheel is original or not.Sorry ,the wheels have been invented and are in use.If one would that way judge the cars they would see clone after clone rolling on the streets.
Instead to greet new strong engine as a new baby that has broken some new barriers in strength they want to hide it from the world.
There is no way that one can invent new chess engine without using the available knowledge. The author has to say what he has used and give due credit where it is due but I find it strange to reject a priory something new that can open new ways of making chess engines even stronger .
If guilty verdict did not come from the majority of the chess community I would think that some self declared moderation team should not make decisions that would prevent chess community from using new chess engines in a situation that is like now with this new engine.That should be the first principle of democracy and also that you are innocent until proven guilty and had you day in the court of justice and not the judgment buy the inquisition ,sorry, moderation team.
In my opinion after this fiasco I would like to see new people in the moderation team who would support new engine development and accept that no new engine can be written from scratch and see that the rules are followed by the authors and avoid mindless nitpicking of every new engines that comes and waiving the stamp of clone or rejected.
I don't know if I am part of silent majority but in this situation I believe that the majority of the people should decide the faith of this engine.
This should be put to vote and whatever people decide should be accepted by all.
And if the people vote for the engine it should be available for all to download and use.

[Michael Sherwin]

I agree! However, it is much simpler than that.

No one can wave a magic wand and make Ipp go away. If I had one, I would make all open source engines stronger than GNU_chess disappear (they would become closed source, but some of them would never have been written or be as strong, if they were)!

Like it or not (moderators/witch hunters) IPP is the new baseline engine. It would be unfair for some to have access to it and others not. So, find the people that did this terrible thing and burn them alive, but leave the rest of us alone.

[bob]

Hi Silvian,
great stuff but here is the problem;

"the moderation team has made its position known on this early on when the first thread regarding the engine reared its head"

What we have here is modern day "intellectual " inquisition where few people decide for the entire chess community what we can or can not use.Since some of them are so fond of bashing old commies from Russia they can not see that they have reaches or even surpassed the intellectual terror they are so ready to criticize .
From their comments one can see that they have the engine in different versions but this is only for them.The light stays with them but the masses have to live in the dark.
Well, the engine is still circulating and people are using and sharing it.So that they can no stop.
I am surprised in that quote they did not say "the engine reared its ugly head".Whatever monster they think this engine is after seeing it destroying Rybka and Shredder I thought it was beautiful.
So far how many people have analyzed and dissected this engine and they could not say for sure is it clone or not.But the "moderation team" has decided:guilty without proving anything.And the rest has to accept they verdict.
According to them if somebody would like to produce new car he would have to reinvent the wheels again.And than they would judge if this wheel is original or not.Sorry ,the wheels have been invented and are in use.If one would that way judge the cars they would see clone after clone rolling on the streets.
Instead to greet new strong engine as a new baby that has broken some new barriers in strength they want to hide it from the world.
There is no way that one can invent new chess engine without using the available knowledge. The author has to say what he has used and give due credit where it is due but I find it strange to reject a priory something new that can open new ways of making chess engines even stronger .
If guilty verdict did not come from the majority of the chess community I would think that some self declared moderation team should not make decisions that would prevent chess community from using new chess engines in a situation that is like now with this new engine.That should be the first principle of democracy and also that you are innocent until proven guilty and had you day in the court of justice and not the judgment buy the inquisition ,sorry, moderation team.
In my opinion after this fiasco I would like to see new people in the moderation team who would support new engine development and accept that no new engine can be written from scratch and see that the rules are followed by the authors and avoid mindless nitpicking of every new engines that comes and waiving the stamp of clone or rejected.
I don't know if I am part of silent majority but in this situation I believe that the majority of the people should decide the faith of this engine.
This should be put to vote and whatever people decide should be accepted by all.
And if the people vote for the engine it should be available for all to download and use.

If you are not happy with the current moderation policies here, I invite you do go somewhere else where things are more in agreement with your views. Such as perhaps web sites in China where software piracy is rampant and not considered a criminal act by the government.

Here, we do not condone piracy. We allow the discussions to continue since clones are on the topic of computer chess. We will not allow links to clones or stolen software to remain because we do not support software piracy in any form.

For those that object to this, again, feel free to find another place to hang out. However, after a threshold is reached, our tolerance for complaints about moderation policies will also exact a response and force you to go somewhere else.

Get off the subject of clones unless you have technical information to contribute.

[Steve B]

What we have here is modern day "intellectual " inquisition where few people decide for the entire chess community what we can or can not use.Since some of them are so fond of bashing old commies from Russia they can not see that they have reaches or even surpassed the intellectual terror they are so ready to criticize .

what member of the CCC Moderation Team "bashed old commies from Russia"?
the three members of the team are listed on every page for your convenience
name them
i will answer for you..
none of them did
in fact we have REMOVED posts of that nature
get your facts straight before you make an accusation like that
Steve

[zamar]

Hello Sirs !
Is this ( I don't know how to name this young creature-sorry ) a clone or not ?

Well, it can be said for 99.9% certaintity that this Ippolit thing is illegal clone. You can easily see from the source that most of the code is decompiled. What else could it be than illegal clone? Well, there is 0.1% chance that somewhere in the Russia lives true computer chess expert, and this is a humoristic way to release a new super-strong open source engine.

Unfortunately, now all computer chess programmers who want to compete for reaching the top are forced to carefully examine the source and re-implement new ideas found there. I've just scratched the surface, but already I can see that the code is full of very interesting and fresh ideas.

[mclane]

in "communistic" countries people who are against the main power get not censored, they get shot in the head.

the moderators in this forum give their best to allow open discussions,
in opposite to internet-sites in china other "communistic" countries.
free speech means much here. but as long as it is not clear that ippolit is a clone or not, as long as rybka author claims that it IS a clone, stolen from source code of rybka, links will not be allowed.
IMO this is ok.

spare your attacks on the moderators,
communistic wishes

[Graham Banks]

Hello Sirs !
Is this ( I don't know how to name this young creature-sorry ) a clone or not ?

Well, it can be said for 99.9% certaintity that this Ippolit thing is illegal clone. You can easily see from the source that most of the code is decompiled. What else could it be than illegal clone?

They don't want to listen because it seems stronger to them than the official and legal Rybka 3.
If they were athletes, they'd probably quite happily use steroids to increase performance.

[slobo]

Hi Silvian,
great stuff but here is the problem;

"the moderation team has made its position known on this early on when the first thread regarding the engine reared its head"

What we have here is modern day "intellectual " inquisition where few people decide for the entire chess community what we can or can not use.Since some of them are so fond of bashing old commies from Russia they can not see that they have reaches or even surpassed the intellectual terror they are so ready to criticize .
From their comments one can see that they have the engine in different versions but this is only for them.The light stays with them but the masses have to live in the dark.
Well, the engine is still circulating and people are using and sharing it.So that they can no stop.
I am surprised in that quote they did not say "the engine reared its ugly head".Whatever monster they think this engine is after seeing it destroying Rybka and Shredder I thought it was beautiful.
So far how many people have analyzed and dissected this engine and they could not say for sure is it clone or not.But the "moderation team" has decided:guilty without proving anything.And the rest has to accept they verdict.
According to them if somebody would like to produce new car he would have to reinvent the wheels again.And than they would judge if this wheel is original or not.Sorry ,the wheels have been invented and are in use.If one would that way judge the cars they would see clone after clone rolling on the streets.
Instead to greet new strong engine as a new baby that has broken some new barriers in strength they want to hide it from the world.
There is no way that one can invent new chess engine without using the available knowledge. The author has to say what he has used and give due credit where it is due but I find it strange to reject a priory something new that can open new ways of making chess engines even stronger .
If guilty verdict did not come from the majority of the chess community I would think that some self declared moderation team should not make decisions that would prevent chess community from using new chess engines in a situation that is like now with this new engine.That should be the first principle of democracy and also that you are innocent until proven guilty and had you day in the court of justice and not the judgment buy the inquisition ,sorry, moderation team.
In my opinion after this fiasco I would like to see new people in the moderation team who would support new engine development and accept that no new engine can be written from scratch and see that the rules are followed by the authors and avoid mindless nitpicking of every new engines that comes and waiving the stamp of clone or rejected.
I don't know if I am part of silent majority but in this situation I believe that the majority of the people should decide the faith of this engine.
This should be put to vote and whatever people decide should be accepted by all.
And if the people vote for the engine it should be available for all to download and use.

If you are not happy with the current moderation policies here, I invite you do go somewhere else where things are more in agreement with your views. Such as perhaps web sites in China where software piracy is rampant and not considered a criminal act by the government.

Here, we do not condone piracy. We allow the discussions to continue since clones are on the topic of computer chess. We will not allow links to clones or stolen software to remain because we do not support software piracy in any form.

For those that object to this, again, feel free to find another place to hang out. However, after a threshold is reached, our tolerance for complaints about moderation policies will also exact a response and force you to go somewhere else.

Get off the subject of clones unless you have technical information to contribute.

Calling Ippolit a "clone" is not an accurate language usage, and you as a university professor, and one of the most respected chess engines programers, know it, for sure.

[Anton]

Hello Sirs !
Is this ( I don't know how to name this young creature-sorry ) a clone or not ?

Well, it can be said for 99.9% certaintity that this Ippolit thing is illegal clone. You can easily see from the source that most of the code is decompiled. What else could it be than illegal clone? Well, there is 0.1% chance that somewhere in the Russia lives true computer chess expert, and this is a humoristic way to release a new super-strong open source engine.

Unfortunately, now all computer chess programmers who want to compete for reaching the top are forced to carefully examine the source and re-implement new ideas found there. I've just scratched the surface, but already I can see that the code is full of very interesting and fresh ideas.

I am curious, If you believe with 99.9% certainty that it is an illegal clone, why are you now reading the source code?

And if you are 99.9% certain, could you please provide the evidence?

Imagine I was to call member X here a child molester, followed by the words "I think he is a child molester because I have heard rumours from other members, and he looks suspicious in his avatar" If others then joined in and said things like, "yes I agree, I am 99.9% sure he is too, it is just a hunch though" Is this acceptable? NO, of course not, it is an exaggerated example for sure, but the principle is the same. A cloning accusation without evidence is nothing more than a personal attack.