Random Musings ...

[benstoker]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

[Harvey Williamson]

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists.

Hmm reading this it reminds me of a former, so called, founder and deposed moderator here!?

[Albert Silver]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

[Steve B]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

thats a reasonable position
i just thought that since the two groups are in such a unique position here because Vas clearly respects their work .perhaps they could come together get his ear better then most?
lets face it..it cant be easy on the testing group members with the current situation either
they are basically taking alot of heat for him and it would probably be appreciated and welcomed by the group's members if he would step up knowing their concerns


Steve

[benstoker]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

I see. It is now a question of morality, the answer resting on whether or not we feel in our bosom a pang of conscience notwithstanding Vas' complete indifference.

[Albert Silver]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

I see. It is now a question of morality, the answer resting on whether or not we feel in our bosom a pang of conscience notwithstanding Vas' complete indifference.

No, not "it is now". It always was. Suppose Vas proved it was taken from his code. Do you think anything other than a moral decision is what would define whether one of these rating lists tested it or not?

[benstoker]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

I see. It is now a question of morality, the answer resting on whether or not we feel in our bosom a pang of conscience notwithstanding Vas' complete indifference.

No, not "it is now". It always was. Suppose Vas proved it was taken from his code. Do you think anything other than a moral decision is what would define whether one of these rating lists tested it or not?

There you go. There's a temporal and logical condition that must be satisfied before reaching the moral question. And that condition is that elusive PROOF from Vas or anyone else that the code was pilfered. But, yes, if Vas gave a rat's ass and did offer us proof, the moral question would obviously become relevant. Since the PROOF is elusive, even non-existent, and since Vas doesn't give a shit, the moral question is premature.

[Milos]

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

Unfortunately conscious can be bought and usually is...

[Harvey Williamson]

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

Unfortunately conscious can be bought and usually is...

btw Milos I hope you accept my nomination for you, Hetman/Hood and Norman to form the next moderation team?

[Albert Silver]

a couple of thoughts regarding the Great Derivatives debate ..


1) Vas in an email recently posted here (with his permission )mentioned that he is not so concerned about the IPPO issue because the main testing groups and organized tournaments dont take the engines seriously(im paraphrasing here)
seems to me that both highly respected testing groups can make a real difference in the computer chess world by at least considering to test these engines or at least notifying Vas that his lack of a clear statement is forcing their hands to begin testing the engines
this just might be the push Vas needs to make a clear and concise statement about IPPO (code similarities etc etc)
i realize this is a hard decision to make but the two groups can really carry the ball here and would perhaps be performing an enormous service to the hobby

The minute the authors of a list decide to do anything in order to force someone to do something they will have made it clear their goal is not longer to test engines, and that their agenda is in fact something else.

actually i did not mean it as a blackmail attempt
i meant it as a good faith concern that the two groups have ..given this point in time
i was thinking along the lines of both groups coming together ,speaking in concert as one and contacting Vas.. asking him to consider making a public comment which can give them at least some assurance that they should not in fact be testing these engines
unless of course the groups still have absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the engines
there does some to be a lack of independence "in appearance"at least if both groups simply refuse to go on testing with nothing concrete to go on at this point
maybe they have some evidence they are relying on that casual observers like myself are not privy to..i dont know


Steve

I tend to view the position a bit differently, but to each his own. On the one hand they have an engine that comes out by anonymous authors who claim they are against capitalism, aim to take from the wealthy and give to the poor, and support the Decembrists. On the other hand you have the author of a well-known engine who claims that this is another ripoff of his work, just as had taken place a couple of years before.

Strelka had all the same earmarks as Ippo: Huge similarities (search and other), but also some significant changes (bitboards and other things IIRC), again, just as here with IPPO.

By now, there are several derivatives of this source with declared authors, but these authors are still building on that shady code. It is true, neither the author of Rybka, nor the authors of Ippo have been forthcoming in detailing evidence one way or the other, so it is a judgment call. Since a similar case *has* happened in the past, and the author of Strelka admitted what he had done, there is a past record that speaks in Vas's favor. With this incomplete information, each one must do as their conscious dictates.

Vas doesn't give a shit. Why do you?

I already said why: "each one must do as their conscious dictates".

I see. It is now a question of morality, the answer resting on whether or not we feel in our bosom a pang of conscience notwithstanding Vas' complete indifference.

No, not "it is now". It always was. Suppose Vas proved it was taken from his code. Do you think anything other than a moral decision is what would define whether one of these rating lists tested it or not?

There you go. There's a temporal and logical condition that must be satisfied before reaching the moral question.

You are mistaken. Proof is required for legality, not morality. We make moral decisions day in and day out, and they are not based on proof. They are based on what we believe. The first judge of who you are and the kind of person you are, is yourself, not others.