Computer chess scene: a heap of ruins

[geots]

Yes, Ed, I got that point: having signed a bit too fast the ICGA letter and then having second thoughts make you feel responsible for Vas.

Absolutely not my friend. I would do it for Bob in a similar situation.

Best to you,

Ed

Hmm from the SAME person that accused me of copying code from ippolit/robolito??? I didn't notice you defending me there. I noticed you making false statements and then being unable to back them up. I even gave you the diff output for the search code you said contained robo* code.

There's more to this story than just "I believe (now) that he didn't copy anything."

I witness the discussion, and he did NOT accused you of copying CODE.

Miguel

You see Miguel, the kind of roadblocks thrown up. I was right there the night you repeatedly asked Bob to show you proof of "A and B". Since obviously HE COULD NOT, he played the game of ignoring what you said, giving an answer to something entirely different. Then answering the same request with a question. Never did he take it on directly. Couldn't have been a communication failure- not as long as you stayed with it. Over and over you tried to pin him down- and he NEVER faced you directly. Does that sound to you like someone who sees the truth as important?

Then, I will be damn if a few days later, on another issue of the case, he did not pull the EXACT PLOY with Sven. He just could not follow the point Sven was trying to make. And he never took that issue on directly.

Look, I admit I don't know a grain of computer science. I have college degrees in 2 different majors. But I imagine both combined with a dollar bill might buy me a coke, if I'm lucky. But I could have stopped after elementary school and still understood what was going on both times.

Now he says Ed accused him of copying code. Must have slipped his mind that you were there, because you witnessed the discussion and said it never happened. Lo and behold- he's caught again.

I remember very well when a day or so later you had had enough, and told him you were not one of his students, and this was the 2nd time you had asked him to stop talking down to you.

Is this the stuff you should have to fight when simply looking for the truth?


gts

[Terry McCracken]

Yes, Ed, I got that point: having signed a bit too fast the ICGA letter and then having second thoughts make you feel responsible for Vas.

Absolutely not my friend. I would do it for Bob in a similar situation.

Best to you,

Ed

Hmm from the SAME person that accused me of copying code from ippolit/robolito??? I didn't notice you defending me there. I noticed you making false statements and then being unable to back them up. I even gave you the diff output for the search code you said contained robo* code.

There's more to this story than just "I believe (now) that he didn't copy anything."

I witness the discussion, and he did NOT accused you of copying CODE.

Miguel

You see Miguel, the kind of roadblocks thrown up. I was right there the night you repeatedly asked Bob to show you proof of "A and B". Since obviously HE COULD NOT, he played the game of ignoring what you said, giving an answer to something entirely different. Then answering the same request with a question. Never did he take it on directly. Couldn't have been a communication failure- not as long as you stayed with it. Over and over you tried to pin him down- and he NEVER faced you directly. Does that sound to you like someone who sees the truth as important?

Then, I will be damn if a few days later, on another issue of the case, he did not pull the EXACT PLOY with Sven. He just could not follow the point Sven was trying to make. And he never took that issue on directly.

Look, I admit I don't know a grain of computer science. I have college degrees in 2 different majors. But I imagine both combined with a dollar bill might buy me a coke, if I'm lucky. But I could have stopped after elementary school and still understood what was going on both times.

Now he says Ed accused him of copying code. Must have slipped his mind that you were there, because you witnessed the discussion and said it never happened. Lo and behold- he's caught again.

I remember very well when a day or so later you had had enough, and told him you were not one of his students, and this was the 2nd time you had asked him to stop talking down to you.

Is this the stuff you should have to fight when simply looking for the truth?


gts

You're a Liar!

[Adam Hair]

Yes, Ed, I got that point: having signed a bit too fast the ICGA letter and then having second thoughts make you feel responsible for Vas.

Absolutely not my friend. I would do it for Bob in a similar situation.

Best to you,

Ed

Hmm from the SAME person that accused me of copying code from ippolit/robolito??? I didn't notice you defending me there. I noticed you making false statements and then being unable to back them up. I even gave you the diff output for the search code you said contained robo* code.

There's more to this story than just "I believe (now) that he didn't copy anything."

I witness the discussion, and he did NOT accused you of copying CODE.

Miguel

I saw some of it. Ed accussed Bob of copying code.

No.

Miguel

YES!

Open Chess, go look.

Look at page 1 of General Topics. Bob started a thread "Still waiting for Ed". The topic was whether or not ideas from Robbolito could be found in Crafty 23.4.

[Nelson Hernandez]

This whole depressing episode is the direct result of numerous people violating one or more of the seven deadly sins, chiefly greed, pride, wrath, envy and sloth. A long and interesting sermon could be written illustrating how vice has brought our hobby to its current debauched and depleted state.

I am hopeful on two grounds.

One, time heals all wounds. It may take a decade but eventually all the bitterness and strife will die down and fade from memory and a new generation of hobbyists will rise up who doesn't remember the controversy and has no opinion of the whole thing other than "that was a long time ago".

Two, interplaying and accelerating the first point, technology marches on in both the hardware and software realm. Ultimately computer chess is about the persistent improvement and extension of human intelligence as expressed through electromechanical devices. That is what this hobby is about, not whether any of the disputants are right or wrong, crazy or sane, noble or venal. That is our focus, no matter how much we may get distracted.

The hobby will carry on. It may go through a period of animosity and despair, but I am confident the torch will be thrown from failing hands because the monumental challenge of bringing chess to near-perfection is nowhere near completed. Others will be attracted to that challenge as we were, and they will be wiser than we were.

[Terry McCracken]

Yes, Ed, I got that point: having signed a bit too fast the ICGA letter and then having second thoughts make you feel responsible for Vas.

Absolutely not my friend. I would do it for Bob in a similar situation.

Best to you,

Ed

Hmm from the SAME person that accused me of copying code from ippolit/robolito??? I didn't notice you defending me there. I noticed you making false statements and then being unable to back them up. I even gave you the diff output for the search code you said contained robo* code.

There's more to this story than just "I believe (now) that he didn't copy anything."

I witness the discussion, and he did NOT accused you of copying CODE.

Miguel

I saw some of it. Ed accussed Bob of copying code.

No.

Miguel

YES!

Open Chess, go look.

Look at page 1 of General Topics. Bob started a thread "Still waiting for Ed". The topic was whether or not ideas from Robbolito could be found in Crafty 23.4.

I've read it.

[michiguel]

Yes, Ed, I got that point: having signed a bit too fast the ICGA letter and then having second thoughts make you feel responsible for Vas.

Absolutely not my friend. I would do it for Bob in a similar situation.

Best to you,

Ed

Hmm from the SAME person that accused me of copying code from ippolit/robolito??? I didn't notice you defending me there. I noticed you making false statements and then being unable to back them up. I even gave you the diff output for the search code you said contained robo* code.

There's more to this story than just "I believe (now) that he didn't copy anything."

I witness the discussion, and he did NOT accused you of copying CODE.

Miguel

I saw some of it. Ed accussed Bob of copying code.

No.

Miguel

YES!

Open Chess, go look.

Look at page 1 of General Topics. Bob started a thread "Still waiting for Ed". The topic was whether or not ideas from Robbolito could be found in Crafty 23.4.

I've read it.

Talking about VR's legacy and how he indirectly influenced top programs
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php ... 1&start=13

And how the "ideas" word "turned" into "code" word
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php ... 1&start=32

Ed clearly did not mention code. But the myth propagated and stayed in many people's mind. It was repeated several times, and now, he is constantly accused of accusing Bob of copying CODE, and being called nuts because of that. Nobody remember how it started, but I do.

And by the way, Ed was completely right about the "legacy point" and how it was completely ignored in the press, when they released the news.

Miguel

[Terry McCracken]

Yes, Ed, I got that point: having signed a bit too fast the ICGA letter and then having second thoughts make you feel responsible for Vas.

Absolutely not my friend. I would do it for Bob in a similar situation.

Best to you,

Ed

Hmm from the SAME person that accused me of copying code from ippolit/robolito??? I didn't notice you defending me there. I noticed you making false statements and then being unable to back them up. I even gave you the diff output for the search code you said contained robo* code.

There's more to this story than just "I believe (now) that he didn't copy anything."

I witness the discussion, and he did NOT accused you of copying CODE.

Miguel

I saw some of it. Ed accussed Bob of copying code.

No.

Miguel

YES!

Open Chess, go look.

Look at page 1 of General Topics. Bob started a thread "Still waiting for Ed". The topic was whether or not ideas from Robbolito could be found in Crafty 23.4.

I've read it.

Talking about VR's legacy and how he indirectly influenced top programs
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php ... 1&start=13

And how the "ideas" word "turned" into "code" word
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php ... 1&start=32

Ed clearly did not mention code. But the myth propagated and stayed in many people's mind. It was repeated several times, and now, he is constantly accused of accusing Bob of copying CODE, and being called nuts because of that. Nobody remember how it started, but I do.

And by the way, Ed was completely right about the "legacy point" and how it was completely ignored in the press, when they released the news.

Miguel

Bob can speak for himself. Ed made accusations whether you read it or not.

I know enough to realize Vas is Guilty as Charged.

[K I Hyams]

This whole depressing episode is the direct result of numerous people violating one or more of the seven deadly sins, chiefly greed, pride, wrath, envy and sloth.

No. This whole depressing episode is the direct result of one person violating one or more of the instructions in Leviticus 19:11.

“Ye shall not steal; neither shall ye deal falsely, nor lie one to another”.

[Dave Mitchell]

This whole depressing episode is the direct result of numerous people violating one or more of the seven deadly sins, chiefly greed, pride, wrath, envy and sloth.

No. This whole depressing episode is the direct result of one person violating one or more of the instructions in Leviticus 19:11.

“Ye shall not steal; neither shall ye deal falsely, nor lie one to another”.

I'm not up on this whole episode with Fruit and the Clones, but as I recall Fabien put out Fruit as open source, unlicensed, and without restrictions.

Fabien knew Fruit was strong, but at that time, decided to release the code, anyway. Nobody pressured him unduly to do this. It was his choice, and I'd describe it as his "with full knowledge" choice.

At that point, any chess author could have used Fruit code, and done so without crediting Fruit, in any way, and without making any payment to Fabien.

A copyright lawyer could fill in the details, here.

So some people did just that, being smart, and being human, and OF COURSE, some didn't mention (or denied), that they'd used code from Fruit. For a commercial program, that's probably a mandatory thing to do. There just isn't that much money in commercial chess programming, not to take advantage of that.

So, like all the rest of us, they lied, and it hurt no one, since everyone was free to do the same thing, if they wanted to.

So now, several years after the fact, there's a big hullabaloo because somebody told a lie?

<< Well I AM shocked! >> <<--satire on!

I thought every boss, co-worker, spouse, son, daughter, preacher, and politician, were pure as the driven snow, and NEVER told a lie.

I guess you don't need me to tell you you're acting like hypocrites, do you?

If you want some Bible reference, try:
"For all have sinned and fallen short of the grace of God", and "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

Programmers are only people, and people are sinners, and why would you expect a standard of behavior that no one can live up to?

I'm only referring to the open source Fruit code, that Fabien released without restriction.

[Evert]

I'm not up on this whole episode with Fruit and the Clones, but as I recall Fabien put out Fruit as open source, unlicensed, and without restrictions.

Wrong. It's released under the GPL, which means that there are restrictions to what you can do with it.

At that point, any chess author could have used Fruit code,

True.
Whether that's desirable or not is another matter entirely.

and done so without crediting Fruit,

False.

in any way, and without making any payment to Fabien.

Falseish.
Having Fruit, he could have got hold of Fruit's source at no additional cost under terms of the GPL. Had Fruit not been free, he would not have been able to obtain the code for free.

So some people did just that, being smart, and being human, and OF COURSE, some didn't mention (or denied), that they'd used code from Fruit. For a commercial program, that's probably a mandatory thing to do. There just isn't that much money in commercial chess programming, not to take advantage of that.

If, for a commercial program, you can't make use of GPL code (which would mean that your own code has to be released under the GPL, which may not be what you want), then you can't make use of GPL code. If you use the code anyway but don't abide by the licence then you're doing something illegal.

If you want some Bible reference, try:

Best leave Bibles out of this, methinks.

Programmers are only people, and people are sinners, and why would you expect a standard of behavior that no one can live up to?

That is a very pessimistic outlook on human nature.

I'm only referring to the open source Fruit code, that Fabien released without restriction.

It was not released without restriction. It was released under the terms of the GPL.

EDIT: and yes, you can take someone's free GPL program, modify it and sell it. However, you may not misrepresent the origin of the software and you must make your own source available to whoever buys your code at no additional cost and without extra restrictions.