Milos wrote:...since coping directly from a GPL program is not wrong at all if you make your source code public. That's exactly the purpose of GPL.
The copying program pretty much has to be GPL, not just open source. For instance Crafty cannot legally include source from a GPL program.
Milos wrote:On the other hand, if you earn money by coping somebody else's code, you are violating GPL even if you copied only a single line, and there is no question about it. Simple message, you wanna go commercial, fine, but be careful what you are doing.
There's nothing wrong with making money on a GPL program, it's just hard to do.
Uri Blass wrote:
2 independent chess programs may have the line i++;
Uri
DagNabbit Uri!! Not only is that clearly falacious, but you clearly copied that i++ line from a program I wrote in 1990! Where did you get your hands on the source code?! You had best not be using that ++ trick in Movei, even if you were smart enough to disguise the variable name
Milos wrote:
On the other hand, if you earn money by coping somebody else's code, you are violating GPL even if you copied only a single line, and there is no question about it. Simple message, you wanna go commercial, fine, but be careful what you are doing.
Actually not, because public domain could well be taken. This is what Vas always said. No?
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
Milos wrote:
On the other hand, if you earn money by coping somebody else's code, you are violating GPL even if you copied only a single line, and there is no question about it. Simple message, you wanna go commercial, fine, but be careful what you are doing.
Actually not, because public domain could well be taken. This is what Vas always said. No?
Who cares about Vasik statements if we except you
_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….
Milos wrote:
On the other hand, if you earn money by coping somebody else's code, you are violating GPL even if you copied only a single line, and there is no question about it. Simple message, you wanna go commercial, fine, but be careful what you are doing.
Actually not, because public domain could well be taken. This is what Vas always said. No?
Bob has explain to you, many times, the relation between GPL and "public domain", but you still have problem to get it. Perhaps too many concepts at the same time?
"Well, I´m just a soul whose intentions are good,
Oh Lord, please don´t let me be misunderstood."
I am willing to keep an open mind about remote Rybka.
I think whether this is a viable model or not comes down to pricing. If you want to use Rybka 24/7 then $750 a year may be a lot. It is probably not a lot if you are a chess professional, but if you're on playchess all the time with an engine just for fun, then your hobby just got more expensive. So it remains to be seen how large the market is for the remote service, at the proposed pricing (which could still change I assume).
Personally I use Rybka mainly for game and position analysis and if I could plug into the remote version from ChessBase I'd probably be fine with that, and I wouldn't run it 24/7. So that may be an ok model for me.
It is an interesting point that, while not the primary motivation for Vas apparently, this model also prevents reverse engineering and piracy.
jdart wrote:I am willing to keep an open mind about remote Rybka.
I think whether this is a viable model or not comes down to pricing. If you want to use Rybka 24/7 then $750 a year may be a lot. It is probably not a lot if you are a chess professional, but if you're on playchess all the time with an engine just for fun, then your hobby just got more expensive. So it remains to be seen how large the market is for the remote service, at the proposed pricing (which could still change I assume).
Personally I use Rybka mainly for game and position analysis and if I could plug into the remote version from ChessBase I'd probably be fine with that, and I wouldn't run it 24/7. So that may be an ok model for me.
It is an interesting point that, while not the primary motivation for Vas apparently, this model also prevents reverse engineering and piracy.
--Jon
If you really use it 24/7, you have to take into account up to date hardware. Renting the fastest quad for a year, to run the last version of the top engine, and access it from everywhere, is not absurd. Hardware updates, electricity + software (if you buy a computer many people end up buying antivirus etc.).
For a professional, buying it per hour (0.50 Euros) may make sense. The main concept is sharing hardware.
The problem is that Rybka will not cater to its core users, which like to have the engine loaded in their home, physically on their computer. Hopefully Rybka 4 standalone will still be a very good product just like Rybka 3 was. The best scenario situation would be to have Rybka 4 remote and Rybka 4 standalone to be of equal strength software wise, but that Rybka remote would have a hardware multiplying factor which would give an extra 100 or 150 ELO more. That doesn't seem like it will happen since it would mean that Vas would again have to deal with someone hacking his work as happened with earlier versions of Rybka. Personally this remote engine is not interesting for me, but I wouldn't mind having a full version Rybka 4 on a hardware card. This would have a much more secure software as well as giving a very strong hardware boost. It seems that this is one of the things that Vas is working at as well, hopefully it will not take too long to incorporate.
