I am feeling ill

[Rolf]

Most criminals are caught because they made a mistake. Just like Vas made a huge mistake when he claimed Strelka as his own code. Which revealed the insides of Rybka 1 for all to see, and there was _plenty_ to see.

So this is your newest take on that Osipov smear? With his mistake to declare that it's his code Vas showed the world what his code was? Vas is a criminal, interesting to hear it from you. I have not enough sanity to satisfy you. Fine. As the saying goes: Hybris goes before a fall.

Isnt it bigot if you argue as if Vas or anyone would have had another choice in such a situation where jerks created that scenario that a Russian or whatever comitted a crime but could never been caught? Should Vas have said that he now would catch the 4 mousquetiers and would torture them to death one after the other until he would hear the details of the plot?

[bob]

Most criminals are caught because they made a mistake. Just like Vas made a huge mistake when he claimed Strelka as his own code. Which revealed the insides of Rybka 1 for all to see, and there was _plenty_ to see.

So this is your newest take on that Osipov smear? With his mistake to declare that it's his code Vas showed the world what his code was? Vas is a criminal, interesting to hear it from you. I have not enough sanity to satisfy you. Fine. As the saying goes: Hybris goes before a fall.

You will note that I did not say "Vas is a criminal". You continue to claim that this investigation was unfair because it only targeted one program/author, not all commercial programs and authors. I pointed out that criminals are caught and prosecuted every day, with no requirement that before one can be prosecuted, all must be prosecuted. You simply "catch as catch can" and deal with what/who you catch. If someone makes a mistake (Vas claiming that strelka is a copy of his code, or a criminal brags to friends about robbing a bank, not knowing that one of the friends is a paid informant to a local law enforcement organization) then they get caught. And prosecuted. Even though there may be (or are) many others doing exactly the same thing. Getting caught just means getting caught. Mistakes happen. Fortunately. Or most illegal acts would go unpunished.

If you must try to interpret what I write, at least read what I write first.

Isnt it bigot if you argue as if Vas or anyone would have had another choice in such a situation where jerks created that scenario that a Russian or whatever comitted a crime but could never been caught? Should Vas have said that he now would catch the 4 mousquetiers and would torture them to death one after the other until he would hear the details of the plot?

I follow the acts like this:

(1) Vas took parts of a GPL program to build a program that he then used to violate the GPL itself, because if you use parts of a GPL program, your program must also be GPL compliant. Rybka 1 was not.

(2) Strelka came from reverse-engineering Rybka 1. Supposedly. The authors claimed so. Vas claimed so. So that much seems to not be in doubt.

(3) it is not illegal to reverse-engineer a GPL program. It is, in theory, foolish since a GPL program must include the source code as spelled out in the GPL itself. So while one _could_ reverse engineer the code, about the only reason one would do that would be to see if the executable appears to come from the released source code. Or, in this case, to derive the source code that was _supposed_ to be included but was not.

So it is hard to try to make the "reverse-engineers" out as bad, since in a normal world, their effort would have been wasted since the source for R1 would have already been public. The only poor decision here was to copy fruit, release a program, claim it as "own work" and violate the GPL.

There is very little doubt left about this happening. Trying to divert the discussion to the reverse-engineers is a little bit like shutting the barn door after the horses have run away. It's too late.

[Rolf]

There is very little doubt left about this happening.

If all run with spikes, spikes cant be discriminated as foulish.

That evil doing is no question, and that anonymously evil doing is even worse, this is no question in all Western countries. You wanna disagree or claim absent? Anyway that's the bias.

[Graham Banks]

(1) Vas took parts of a GPL program to build a program that he then used to violate the GPL itself, because if you use parts of a GPL program, your program must also be GPL compliant. Rybka 1 was not.

Vas posted the following in the Rybka forum:

Once again: Rybka is 100% original at the source code level, not counting public-domain snippets like population cnt, etc.

Zach responded with:

Perhaps you could explain to me, then, why:

Rybka's piece square tables are generated from the same code as Fruit's (same KnightRank, etc. constants, but different KnightRankOpening weights)
Rybka's pawn evaluation is virtually identical to Fruit's (different weights again, candidate pawns and backward pawns have a very slightly different formulation)
Rybka's passed pawn evaluation is virtually identical to Fruit's (same bonuses using the quad array {0...,26,77,154,256}, only difference is weights and free_passer split into 3 separate bonuses and based on rank)
Rybka's piece evaluation is virtually identical to Fruit's (different weights only)
Rybka's king shelter evaluation is virtually identical to Fruit's (different weights again, king square generalized to C1, E1, or G1 to store in the pawn table, and a slightly different formula for shelter_file()/storm_file())
Rybka's king safety evaluation is virtually identical to Fruit's (different weights for KingAttackWeight, KingAttackUnit)
Rybka's "pattern" evaluation is virtually identical to Fruit's (different weights, TrappedBishop is not halved for A6/H6).

I have confirmed all of this from reverse engineering Rybka 1, though anyone can see for themselves by looking at Strelka. Rybka's entire evaluation is basically an optimized and tuned bitboard translation of Fruit's, with Fruit's material evaluation replaced by the infamous lookup table. EVERY single evaluation term in Rybka 1, except for the material imbalance table, appears in Fruit. If everyone wants to consider that "original", then computer chess is really dead.

And this is only the evaluation. There are many more similarities...

With so much talent and expertise, I really wish that Zach would focus on making his engine ZCT a real killer.

[Alexander Schmidt]

With so much talent and expertise, I really wish that Zach would focus on making his engine ZCT a real killer.

Probably Zach wants to create a killer chess engine by himself, this usually takes some years.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

With so much talent and expertise, I really wish that Zach would focus on making his engine ZCT a real killer.

Probably Zach wants to create a killer chess engine by himself, this usually takes some years.

He will and I predict that to happen in 2-3 years from now....
Dr.D

[S.Taylor]

I think that I have contracted the Hippo flu!

.

I must compliment you wholeheartedly on the humor with your heading to this thread!

[kingliveson]

The prosecuting team is refusing to provide any sort of evidence and is asking for a conviction by demand—and for this reason, interest and support continuously grow for RobboLito. There is a case to be made that CCC interlocutory injunction on links to websites hosting the chess engine ought to be lifted.

On October 21, 2009, the following comments were posted on rybkaforum.net:

Hello Rybka team. Do you suspect this thing to be some sort of clone or not? Some sort of statement would be appreciated. I don't want to feel like a bandit.

There was an open-"source" (using the term loosely) clone of Rybka 3 released in the spring. Unlike the last time, there was no real attempt to hide the cloning - the hackers were even kind enough to keep me updated via email.

An intelligent individual reading the response from IM Rajlich would conclude evasively crafty language is being used to suggest and further instigate rather than providing unequivocal answer. Is it possible Rajlich believes it is impossible for there to be today another chess engine so strong without it being a derivation of his work and hence sprouts his suspicions? The chess community in general is not looking for hints, but seeks a definite statement accompanied with proof.

Rybka development team and its distributors have not named RobboLito to be a clone of Rybka and for anyone else to proclaim so is simply propaganda and libelous. This is not a situation where only an executable file is provided—the source code of RobboLito is publicly available for examination which should make for easy proof.

Some of the accusations are borderline silly. One bogus account claims RobboLito is derived from stolen yet to be released Rybka 4 source code. There is even suggestion that Vasik Rajlich is behind the release of RobboLito—there is no logical explanation for this "counter-intelligence" approach.

According to RobboLito developers, the chess engine builds upon previous works from KAISSA, Crafty, Fruit, Toga, Rybka, Strelka, etc. Where is the wrongdoing? Here is excerpts from an interview with Vasik Rajlich dated 05.12.2005:

...How much influence do the ideas of Fruit have on the future of [computer chess]?

…I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.

Harvey Williamson (sysop on playchess.com) is not allowing RobboLito on the server. I sent Chessbase an email requesting that it clarifies its position—four emails have been sent; one was sent to info@chessbase.com, another was sent to sysop@chessbase.com, and 2 others were sent using Chessbase Mail to Support web form on the company’s website. I have received neither a response nor an acknowledgment of my emails.

Considering that Rybka development team and its distributors have not named RobboLito to be a clone of their program, but hinting that it may be is not sufficient for an injunction. I ask that the moderators reconsider the current position. Of course we all know where to get RobboLito. This is about principles and symbolism—not allowing links to website hosting RobboLito in essence is by proxy delegitimizing a genuine chess engine based on gossips and unfounded and unproven allegations.

Note: I personally admire Vasik Rajlich’s skills as I do many others who have contributed a great deal to the advancement of computer chess.

Franklin

[Rolf]

You continue to claim that this investigation was unfair because it only targeted one program/author, not all commercial programs and authors. I pointed out that criminals are caught and prosecuted every day, with no requirement that before one can be prosecuted, all must be prosecuted. You simply "catch as catch can" and deal with what/who you catch.

Bob, you didnt quite understand my point. My fault of course. Let me try once more. And please grant me your protection as a mod.

We have always the same debate if it goes about crime, revenge and that IMO a democratic system should do this or that, for all not execute death penalties.

I do NOT contradict because Vas as you think was taken by chance, and not also the others, but I say, again with your protection as mod I am allowed to have the opinion that one should never use undemocratic, unethical methods to "reveil" something other than blackmail, murder or such cases.

I was never your opponent in making fertilizer but I was arguing that such a thought should be published lightly and for all under no stress but in a debate in computerchess circles.

We have no murder case at all. We have Rybka, the best program. By a notable scientist from MIT. My argument is this. You think there is something. You research. All in silence. Not like Donninger. Everythink about using illegal methods are banished in public. Then you come closer to the core. You evaluate, here 10% Fruit if ever, there then the strikingly new stuff that brings the extra power. All original Rajlich. Then you consider: is this now a murder case or should it be a witchhunt after Vas? Are you God? Then you inform your collegues all silently. Guys this Vas is a talent.Rybka is years ahead. He should be told to clean a bit and case closed. NB Fabien had retired and wanted that his code lived on. All programmers could profit but only Vas understood it well enough.

So my verdict you reacted in lynch manner without any data about those who might have taken but with less genius. You was driven by obsession against Vas but not because was guilty in any real life sense. Perhaps it was a fault, but that was corrected. Case closed and not such a campaign. You absolutely overreacted.

Now you are basing on anonymous jerks. You agree with multi-time cloners like Norm. Look, this is ok in extreme crime cases, but not in such computerchess sheneningas.

You are a free mann, so you can still correct and change your mind. You are Hyatt, not McCarthy, right? Why was this noble social doctor called back and disarmed? Because he was all wrong? Nope. But because the costs for society became too high in all the mistrust.

Bob, dont feed the anonymous jerks. Dont feed blackmailers. Dont feed cloners. But show some respect for a guy like Vasik, who still has the strongest entity available.

For the best of computerchess.

Let' not be Tall Poppy infected. Let's believe in honesty of people from MIT.


P.S. Please add the NOT into the text where I have forgotten. For me as a German it's extremely difficult to adapt to that special trick in your language. Sorry. The attentive reader will discover what was meant.

[Graham Banks]

With so much talent and expertise, I really wish that Zach would focus on making his engine ZCT a real killer.

Probably Zach wants to create a killer chess engine by himself, this usually takes some years.

With so much information gleaned from reverse engineering or disassembling other engines, it might be quicker now.