Vasik's Contribution

[tomgdrums]

I love to see Vas's old posts. What is use username here?

You love to see Vas's old posts? Here is one of them:

"Vasik Rajlich wrote:
Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake: Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things."

It is a bit of a pity that Rybka won't make the same contribution to the computer chess community, but at the moment I must also think about protecting my secrets. It's the eternal struggle for a computer chess programmer. "

I don't know why you guys are always on Vas about protecting code. That is an individual choice for every programmer. The Stockfish guys choose to share their code. Vas doesn't. The Fruit guy did etc. etc.

Neither is wrong or right. The person who builds it has that choice.

Just as we have a choice whether or not we want to buy or use an engine.

The Houdini guy doesn't share his code. Do you criticize him for that?

I don't as it is his choice. Just as he has chosen to say that Houdini can not be used for commercial reasons.

Do you criticize the bookup guy for using the free Stockfish engine for his Masterchess 7000 and THEN charging for it?

See there are all sorts of choices being made.

I have made the choice NOT to buy the Rybka 4 opening book because I can only use it in a chessbase GUI and there are no updates to it.

I get better service and more usefulness with the Hiarcs opening book subscription. I have made my choice!

The R4 opening book people have made their choice on how to distribute their product. I don't like it and I won't use it but that doesn't make them evil or me righteous.

It is all just a bunch of choices.

[Dave Mitchell]

Getting on Vas for not releasing his code is understandable. Rybka has been seen as the next step up in strength, and everybody wants to know how it was done, and what can make the next step up - and then the next step up after that....

For professionals relying on the strength of their program to provide income, it's a decidedly different matter, of course. We're all on this ship called CC, but the experience of those dancing up topside, is a lot different from the experiences of those working down in the engine room.

[Sylwy]

I don't know why you guys are always on Vas about protecting code. That is an individual choice for every programmer.

Jawohl !

Everybody can choose : money & secrets or free & progress !
I selected the sky for today !
You ?

Commercial regards ,
S

[De Vos W]

mhalstern wrote:
I love to see Vas's old posts


so i gave him an old Vas post, that is all.

[Uri Blass]

there is something wrong if your intent is to misinform people for the sake of person gain,
IMHO.

What does this statement mean?

kgburcham

When you create the impression in public that the eval is the key issue, but secretly invest in search instead, even reducing displayed search depth to keep the public focussed on eval.

I think that every intelligent person(who was interested in rybka's evaluation) could understand that the search depth is misleading and non intelligent people have no chance to beat rybka.

You do not need the code of Rybka to see it.
If you think that the secret of rybka is evaluation then the first thing that you do is making matches at depth 1 between rybka and other programs to learn more about rybka's evaluation.

When you analyze the games you see that rybka win again and again thanks to tactics so you understand that the depth of rybka is misleading.

I believe that intelligent people could also easily find that the information about number of nodes is misleading and I found it a long time before strelka by analyzing positions with many captures(like king and 8 queens against king and 8 queens) when the qsearch of many programs explode(rybka1 beta also had the same problem) and I found strange things about the number of nodes(like having less than 10 nodes per second after a long time in some positions)

I believe that the misleading information clearly helped the opponents of rybka because it encouraged people who disliked it to do reverse engineering to rybka.

Giving misleading information about number of nodes and about depth probably increased the knowledge of the public about computer chess because I doubt if people had enough motivation to develop and release free code of strelka without this misleading information.

Uri

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

there is something wrong if your intent is to misinform people for the sake of person gain,
IMHO.

What does this statement mean?

kgburcham

When you create the impression in public that the eval is the key issue, but secretly invest in search instead, even reducing displayed search depth to keep the public focussed on eval.

I think that every intelligent person(who was interested in rybka's evaluation) could understand that the search depth is misleading and non intelligent people have no chance to beat rybka.

You do not need the code of Rybka to see it.
If you think that the secret of rybka is evaluation then the first thing that you do is making matches at depth 1 between rybka and other programs to learn more about rybka's evaluation.

When you analyze the games you see that rybka win again and again thanks to tactics so you understand that the depth of rybka is misleading.

I believe that intelligent people could also easily find that the information about number of nodes is misleading and I found it a long time before strelka by analyzing positions with many captures(like king and 8 queens against king and 8 queens) when the qsearch of many programs explode(rybka1 beta also had the same problem) and I found strange things about the number of nodes(like having less than 10 nodes per second after a long time in some positions)

I believe that the misleading information clearly helped the opponents of rybka because it encouraged people who disliked it to do reverse engineering to rybka.

Giving misleading information about number of nodes and about depth probably increased the knowledge of the public about computer chess because I doubt if people had enough motivation to develop and release free code of strelka without this misleading information.

Uri

Absolutely correct Uri....it bounced back to him....
But make no doubts....Vasik knows that his stories related to Rybka's "superior" evaluation will be blown up....he just needed time to slow down a bit the competition while he tries to further improve his tiny Rybka....
Dr.D

[Dann Corbit]

There are people who have heard someone else say something. On the basis of what they have heard, they simply believe it without verifying it for themselves.

Personally, I do not know if Vas has done something wrong. I do not consider him some sort of chess deity. I do think that in general he is a nice guy. At any rate, I think that accusations should have a foundation besides what someone heard whispered in a hallway.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

There are people who have heard someone else say something. On the basis of what they have heard, they simply believe it without verifying it for themselves.

Personally, I do not know if Vas has done something wrong. I do not consider him some sort of chess deity. I do think that in general he is a nice guy. At any rate, I think that accusations should have a foundation besides what someone heard whispered in a hallway.

He's a nice guy in general,yes....but only in general....

[Dann Corbit]

There are people who have heard someone else say something. On the basis of what they have heard, they simply believe it without verifying it for themselves.

Personally, I do not know if Vas has done something wrong. I do not consider him some sort of chess deity. I do think that in general he is a nice guy. At any rate, I think that accusations should have a foundation besides what someone heard whispered in a hallway.

He's a nice guy in general,yes....but only in general....

Have you exchanged email with him or had any other personal interaction, or are you forming your opinions based on the sole criteria of what you heard someone else say?

[Milos]

Have you exchanged email with him or had any other personal interaction, or are you forming your opinions based on the sole criteria of what you heard someone else say?

How does he react in personal mail correspondence is completely irrelevant, it can only show your personal bias.
His numerous lies, deception and fabrications, selfish only money-driven behavior, false accusations, readiness to violates terms and contracts (GPL), mudslinging, attitude that the cause justifies the means, total lack of any respect towards customers, this all makes him nothing but dishonest and immoral person.
Thinking about such a person as a nice guy is certainly not something you should be proud of...