Fabien's open letter to the community

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I've just been honest with Vasik in the Rybka forum....here's what I've just posted there....

Rajlich....you're the biggest crook ever to influence the computer chess community....
The same goes for your hellhounds that keep barking and leaking your feet all these years....
Dr.D

Of course it won't last long and most probably I'll be banned for life but hey....you can always register there with funny accounts like bannedforlife

If I may comment this, i'll just point the fact that leaking is what Julian Assange do, not Rybka's zealots.

Also, I'd like to say that I'm starting to feel a bit uncomfortable with what this thread is currently going to : flaming someone and taking pleasure into some people's problems. I share Mr. Hyatt's opinion that this discussion should stay civil. And taking pleasure into someone else's problems is definitely not civil. To say the least.

How about all these years of decieving and lying to people
And how about attacking and spitting over any program that even tries to come close to Rybka in terms of playing ability

Otherwise,I do respect your point of view
Hell gates are finally wide open for Rybka and it's author regards,
Dr.D

[bhlangonijr]

The whole Rybka team and their hardcore supporters must be banned from the the honest circle of the computer ches community....
I'm really glad that I was behind the right side of the fence all this time
Dr.D

Dr.D, maybe the "hardcore supporters" are just good people that like Rybka as a nice tool, regardless of its dubious origin (the tone of your posts reminds me a show satirizing a terrorist: "Infidels, I kill you!"). They can change their mind. This is not a messianic mission with sides to stand.
Why not just try to discuss in a civilized manner and with good arguments?

Regards,

[rbarreira]

The proof is the author of Fruit himself. "Fabien's open letter to the community". And Vas statement that he claimed that Strelka 2.0 is a clone of Rybka 1.0. This linked Fruit code with Rybka code.

Read it again, then. As many times as it needed to register. He says "legally 'there is no issue". Which means no GPL violation, i.e. no copying of code.

Now I understand of course you take Fabien for an idiot, so that you can ignoe what he writes completely, and just want to use the fact that he says anything at all as a good opprtunity to shoot off your mouth aganst those that you dislike.

But I take Fabien kind of seriously. "No copying of code, but a translation of the algorithm".

So 'poof' goes your 'proof'...

Actually Fabien didn't say that.

Here is what he actually said (emphasis mine):

So legally there was no issue that I knew of.

(and he was talking about Strelka here, not Rybka)

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

VR used Fruit code. Noone who looked at the facts can disagree.

Wrong. Fabien just wrote he disagreed. "Reading" or "re-writing" is not "using" code in the normal meaning of the word.
...

HGM,

it is a pity that you have decided not to understand Fabien's post.
I know you can, if you choose to.

Matthias.

Aha....agreed here....
Dr.D

[De Vos W]

VR used Fruit code. Noone who looked at the facts can disagree.

Wrong. Fabien just wrote he disagreed. "Reading" or "re-writing" is not "using" code in the normal meaning of the word.

Maybe everything is rewritten, but that would still be a GPL violation.

Wrong again. Copyrights do not extend to rewrite.

What I wrote many times is: We cannot say if this was a GPL violation or not as long as Fabien doesn't complain.

OK, so you are not only wrong on all counts now, you were wrong many times before. Nice to let us know. If it is a GPL violation follows from examining the Fruit code and the Rybka binary. Fabien's opinion on this is completely irrelevant. Justice in this world is done by facts, not by opinions of people who are considered important or respected. And legal action can only be taken by the FSF, as they own the copyrights, and Fabien is no longer an interested party.

Now he complained, now we know Rybka is illegal.

Only those that cannot understand what they read 'know' this...

I find your prejudice and intellectual dishonesty extremely irritating, please join the Rybka forum.

[JuLieN]

The proof is the author of Fruit himself. "Fabien's open letter to the community". And Vas statement that he claimed that Strelka 2.0 is a clone of Rybka 1.0. This linked Fruit code with Rybka code.

Read it again, then. As many times as it needed to register. He says "legally 'there is no issue". Which means no GPL violation, i.e. no copying of code.

Now I understand of course you take Fabien for an idiot, so that you can ignoe what he writes completely, and just want to use the fact that he says anything at all as a good opprtunity to shoot off your mouth aganst those that you dislike.

But I take Fabien kind of seriously. "No copying of code, but a translation of the algorithm".

So 'poof' goes your 'proof'...

Actually Fabien didn't say that.

Here is what he actually said (emphasis mine):

So legally there was no issue that I knew of.

(and he was talking about Strelka here, not Rybka)

Excellent point Ricardo! Strelka actually complies with the GPL, as Youri released its source code. Besides, Strelka was free. So the problem remains for Rybka.

Here I will add another point of law : in most western countries, users DO have the right to decompile a program to understand how it works. But this must remain for personal use. So if Youri discloses the decompiled sources of a closed-sources program into the wild, then he's in contradiction with western computer program users legislations (I have no clue, though, of where Russia stands on this point). But this only concern the Rybka<>Strelka relations, not the Strelka<>Fruit, as Fruit is open sourced.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

The whole Rybka team and their hardcore supporters must be banned from the the honest circle of the computer ches community....
I'm really glad that I was behind the right side of the fence all this time
Dr.D

Dr.D, maybe the "hardcore supporters" are just good people that like Rybka as a nice tool, regardless of its dubious origin (the tone of your posts reminds me a show satirizing a terrorist: "Infidels, I kill you!"). They can change their mind. This is not a messianic mission with sides to stand.
Why not just try to discuss in a civilized manner and with good arguments?

Regards,

After all these years of lies and unjustified financial benifits I don't think a civilized manners have a place here,not to mention the huge unrespect and ignorance toward the customers and fans of Rybka....The snake's head must be cut off ASAP....
Even is a chess game,if you have the opportunity to stear your opponent to a crumpled position,would you keep a civilized manner in terms of play
Don't think so regards,
Dr.D

[Graham Banks]

The proof is the author of Fruit himself. "Fabien's open letter to the community". And Vas statement that he claimed that Strelka 2.0 is a clone of Rybka 1.0. This linked Fruit code with Rybka code.

Read it again, then. As many times as it needed to register. He says "legally 'there is no issue". Which means no GPL violation, i.e. no copying of code.

Now I understand of course you take Fabien for an idiot, so that you can ignoe what he writes completely, and just want to use the fact that he says anything at all as a good opprtunity to shoot off your mouth aganst those that you dislike.

But I take Fabien kind of seriously. "No copying of code, but a translation of the algorithm".

So 'poof' goes your 'proof'...

Actually Fabien didn't say that.

Here is what he actually said (emphasis mine):

So legally there was no issue that I knew of.

(and he was talking about Strelka here, not Rybka)

Excellent point Ricardo! Strelka actually complies with the GPL, as Youri released its source code. Besides, Strelka was free. So the problem remains for Rybka.

Here I will add another point of law : in most western countries, users DO have the right to decompile a program to understand how it works. But this must remain for personal use. So if Youri discloses the decompiled sources of a closed-sources program into the wild, then he's in contradiction with western computer program users legislations (I have no clue, though, of where Russia stands on this point). But this only concern the Rybka<>Strelka relations, not the Strelka<>Fruit, as Fruit is open sourced.

Here is what Anthony Cozzie had to say about Strelka:

Hello,

I took a look at the Strelka sources (sorry, couldn't contain my curiosity). I do sympathize with your legal issues and hope you can work something out. IIRC disassembly is legal but I can't imagine that releasing source code is. The worst part is that I think it will be very difficult to prevent this in the future. I looked into some of these things and unfortunately obfuscation seems to be theoretically impossible, although at least you can waste some of Osipov's time. However, you can take heart that there isn't really anything your competitors can learn from Strelka anyway

Which is why I'm surprised no one is talking about the actual source code, which by your own admission is very similar to Rybka 1.0. I know a lot of the people here are basically chess players and not programmers, but that no one has taken the time to spend an hour examining the most dominant chess program in 5 years? I expected that Rybka was going to be a fast simple program with an obfuscated node count, but I had no idea just how right that was going to be. On my machine the 32-bit Strelka gets 1.2 million nps or so, which means a 64 bit compile would get 2.5M, or about 5X as fast as my poor little Zappa. In terms of knowledge, there is very little that is not in well known except for the material tables, which should be very fast. I'm also pretty amazed at how aggressively the search prunes. Not only will Strelka drop straight into the q-search on a depth-3 search search, but because it orders all captures first, it will reduce almost all noncapture/check moves.

Anyway, in my professional opinion Strelka is basically Fritz5 + history reductions + bigger (but not more) mobility/passed pawn terms + super-vasik-material evaluation. What's amazing to me is how well it works. I don't know whether to laugh at the silliness of all the speculation surrounding Rybka and how horribly wrong it was, or congratulate you for taking a completely different path than everyone else.

cheers,

anthony

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... l?tid=3006

[K I Hyams]

I've just been honest with Vasik in the Rybka forum....here's what I've just posted there....

Rajlich....you're the biggest crook ever to influence the computer chess community....
The same goes for your hellhounds that keep barking and leaking your feet all these years....
Dr.D

Of course it won't last long and most probably I'll be banned for life but hey....you can always register there with funny accounts like bannedforlife

Hi Wael,
Out of curiosity, I have visited the Rybka site on a couple of occasions recently in order to see how the fart catchers are reacting. I can't stay there long because the urge to indulge in self-mutilation becomes uncontrollable. You mention the member who writes under the pseudonym "bannedforlife". Reading his posts leads you to the conclusion that he couldn't have chosen a more inappropriate name for himself. Perhaps we underrate him and he has a self-deprecating sense of humour.

This thread is very valuable for a number of reasons. Can I please add my name to those you urge you to restrain yourself.
Keith.

[Houdini]

If you mean that we should be aware that our lists are used as a false evidence against engines, then I must say I haven't been aware of this up to this point.

That is exactly what has happened.
Your unconditional banning of some engines has made real evidence unnecessary.

Robert