To Moderation - personal attacks on Vas

[Spock]

I think it is well accepted on the forum that personal attacks and harassment are against the rules. Yet, I see almost every day now Vas being accused of stealing code, accused of being dishonest, accused of illegal acts, accused of almost everything. both directly, indirectly and by insinuation. Many of these posts are in my view personal attacks on him as a person and on his character and on his reputation. Why are they allowed to remain ?

I am no fanboy and Vas is not my god. I just don't like to see ANYONE treated like this man is being treated.

So, to the moderators - yes I respect and fully support your decisions, but please I urge you to be diligent over these posts, and bear my comments in mind. Put yourself in Vas's shoes and see how you would feel.

Thank you.

[bob]

I think it is well accepted on the forum that personal attacks and harassment are against the rules. Yet, I see almost every day now Vas being accused of stealing code, accused of being dishonest, accused of illegal acts, accused of almost everything. both directly, indirectly and by insinuation. Many of these posts are in my view personal attacks on him as a person and on his character and on his reputation. Why are they allowed to remain ?

I'm am no fanboy and Vas is not my god. I just don't like to see ANYONE treated like this man is being treated.

So, to the moderators - yes I respect and fully support your decisions, but please I urge you to be diligent over these posts, and bear my comments in mind.

Thank you.

A personal attack is a bit different from analyzing a program and discovering that code was taken from another program. This forum _is_ about computer chess, computer chess programming, and eventually a little bit of computer programming morals comes into play.

The problem is that the evidence showing pieces of fruit in Rybka 1 is substantial. Vas _still_ claims there is absolutely no fruit code in Rybka. Or did he claim that he "took lots of things from fruit"? Or? That's the problem here. One day he took "lots of things" and went on and on about how such an open source project helped him. Then he says it was only +20 Elo. Yet he jumped from almost the weakest program in the previous CCT event mentioned, to the top, in one version? Not just unlikely on his own. Impossible. But then he did say he took "lots" from Fruit. And later said "lots" was only worth 20 Elo. And the circle continues.

Once everyone is happy with the answers, these threads won't keep popping up. But until they are happy, we are going to be dealing with this for some time. As will the next group of moderators. And the group after that. To stop these discussions here is a ridiculous concept, as we formed CCC to discuss these (and many other) types of computer-chess related topics.

If not here, where?

[Spock]

For the record then - are you accusing Vas of being a liar when he says Rybka is 100% original source code ?

[bob]

For the record then - are you accusing Vas of being a liar when he says Rybka is 100% original source code ?

If he says Rybka 1 has no fruit code whatsoever, then I would certainly say that. If he simply says "Rybka has no fruit code" that is a different statement, since I have not personally looked at any disassembled Rybka 2 or 3 code at all.

But rest assured, Rybka 1 does have code from Fruit. Unless you somehow believe that two different people can write identical code completely independently, for a program as complex as chess. Students don't write identical code for assignments that are 100-200 lines long. Or even for assignments 50 lines long. Statistically, I suppose it _could_ happen. Just as I could flip 1,000,000 heads in a row. But it is not very likely at all.

[Nasir_Shaheen]

For the record then - are you accusing Vas of being a liar when he says Rybka is 100% original source code ?

If he says Rybka 1 has no fruit code whatsoever, then I would certainly say that. If he simply says "Rybka has no fruit code" that is a different statement, since I have not personally looked at any disassembled Rybka 2 or 3 code at all.

But rest assured, Rybka 1 does have code from Fruit. Unless you somehow believe that two different people can write identical code completely independently, for a program as complex as chess. Students don't write identical code for assignments that are 100-200 lines long. Or even for assignments 50 lines long. Statistically, I suppose it _could_ happen. Just as I could flip 1,000,000 heads in a row. But it is not very likely at all.

Hi Hyatt , Some young programmer Zach Wegner has given some points in rybka forum to show that rybka 1 is based on fruit , the points he given are following :

" 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 *****. 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.. "
..........................................................................................................

As i don't have any back ground in Programming so I want your openion on these points . Are these points valid ?
If YES , then there is not doubt that Vas has violated the GPL.

Also in this case reverese engineering the current Rybka is absolutely legal.

[Eelco de Groot]

As i don't have any back ground in Programming so I want your openion on these points . Are these points valid ?
If YES , then there is not doubt that Vas has violated the GPL.

This is not for Robert to decide but in principle it would be a case for the Free Software Foundation to take a decision on.

Also in this case reverese engineering the current Rybka is absolutely legal.

As you say you don't have any background in programming maybe you can't decide whether this is a case of reverse engineering, because the experts can not either. By the way in most countries making reverse engineered code public is absolutely not legal. So please refrain from making such statements.

Nothing personal but this forum has had enough speculation as it is, as we do not have the data. Neither do I. Thank you very much for your contribution.

Eelco

[Nasir_Shaheen]

To me Ippolit is not the main issue any more , now the bigger issue is that whether Rybka is based on Fruit or not ?.

BTW if an engine is based on GPL engine then by definatin it should contain its source code also and then whats wrong in getting the code by reverse engineering such an engine which should contain that source code in first place.

I have seen that Vasik's supporters are avoiding the basic questions put up on this forum by Rober Hyatt.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I think it is well accepted on the forum that personal attacks and harassment are against the rules. Yet, I see almost every day now Vas being accused of stealing code, accused of being dishonest, accused of illegal acts, accused of almost everything. both directly, indirectly and by insinuation. Many of these posts are in my view personal attacks on him as a person and on his character and on his reputation. Why are they allowed to remain ?

I am no fanboy and Vas is not my god. I just don't like to see ANYONE treated like this man is being treated.

So, to the moderators - yes I respect and fully support your decisions, but please I urge you to be diligent over these posts, and bear my comments in mind. Put yourself in Vas's shoes and see how you would feel.

Thank you.

Why don't you hit the "report button" and complain officialy Ray
Even better,Vasik can do it himself if he feels so offended or insulted....
Dr.D

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

For the record then - are you accusing Vas of being a liar when he says Rybka is 100% original source code ?

For that I don't know,but ragarding Rybka 3+ release he is....
Dr.D

[Rolf]

To me

Who's that? Another anonymous chess cyber terrorist?