The "well meaning" witch hunters have caused much

[Michael Sherwin]

According to an investigation and subsequent report by someone that is known as BB it is concluded that Ippolit is not a reversed engineered Rybka. There are similarities between the two as there are in all chess programs that use variations of alpha-beta. However, the similarities mostly can be traced back to Crafty, Fruit and Strelka. The Rybka specific stuff appears to be mostly non-existent in Ippolit. And also, the differences between the two programs in every part of the code is massive. The witch hunters have been proven to have been hoodwinked into the believing of a lie.

If people are strange or different (like the original Ippolit 'team') then some people are easily swayed into believing the worst about them and that they are 'witches' and should be 'burned' or 'drowned' out as Ippolit was. They thought that the 'Ippolites' (and that includes members here that asked for proof) were the evil doers, when in fact it was they themselves that were perpetrating the evil having been deceived by others and by their own peculiar bias. At least this time we can be glad that no one was hunting down innocent people and murdering them. Okay, I am being a little dramatic, but only as a means to show that the emotions and thought patterns are the same as those people that in the past, did hunt down and murder innocent people for being different or just simply of having been accused of something deserving death in their minds.

So, now that all the false accusations of cloning have been dealt with and hopefully put to rest (although some may still persist in the unsubstantiated lies) we can reevaluate the original claims by the Ippolit web site. To paraphrase as simply as possible, they state that Ippolit was originally written in a 'Russian chess language' known as b-code. That it used ideas from some well known 'ships' (chess engines) and did not copy any code. That it was stronger than Ryba, because of the chess knowledge added by the original author. None of which has been proven to be false. The known lies are from the opposing side. Therefore it makes sense to take the Ippolit site at its word. If we do that, then we must assume that the Ippolit.c source was somehow derived from the original b-code and that it was done that way to make Ippolit available to the rest of the world. I can not read and understand the b-code snippets presented on their site and no one else has been able to understand it enough to create a working engine from it, so it makes perfect sense to have created the Ippolit.c source file for dissemination. We do not know exactly how that was done, but my guess is that the b-code compiler does not create binaries directly. Rather, it could produce assembler code that was translated to C or just produce the C code directly. If the C code was produced directly it is most likely in Russian. It would then have had its variable names translated to English. That was very nice of them!

The harm has been done between the members here and will most likely be around for a long time. We should, however, forgive, forget and carry on as if none of this ever happened. It is easy for me as I never hold a grudge.

[Matthias Gemuh]

According to an investigation and subsequent report by someone that is known as BB it is concluded that Ippolit is not a reversed engineered Rybka. There are similarities between the two as there are in all chess programs that use variations of alpha-beta. However, the similarities mostly can be traced back to Crafty, Fruit and Strelka. The Rybka specific stuff appears to be mostly non-existent in Ippolit. And also, the differences between the two programs in every part of the code is massive. The witch hunters have been proven to have been hoodwinked into the believing of a lie.

If people are strange or different (like the original Ippolit 'team') then some people are easily swayed into believing the worst about them and that they are 'witches' and should be 'burned' or 'drowned' out as Ippolit was. They thought that the 'Ippolites' (and that includes members here that asked for proof) were the evil doers, when in fact it was they themselves that were perpetrating the evil having been deceived by others and by their own peculiar bias. At least this time we can be glad that no one was hunting down innocent people and murdering them. Okay, I am being a little dramatic, but only as a means to show that the emotions and thought patterns are the same as those people that in the past, did hunt down and murder innocent people for being different or just simply of having been accused of something deserving death in their minds.

So, now that all the false accusations of cloning have been dealt with and hopefully put to rest (although some may still persist in the unsubstantiated lies) we can reevaluate the original claims by the Ippolit web site. To paraphrase as simply as possible, they state that Ippolit was originally written in a 'Russian chess language' known as b-code. That it used ideas from some well known 'ships' (chess engines) and did not copy any code. That it was stronger than Ryba, because of the chess knowledge added by the original author. None of which has been proven to be false. The known lies are from the opposing side. Therefore it makes sense to take the Ippolit site at its word. If we do that, then we must assume that the Ippolit.c source was somehow derived from the original b-code and that it was done that way to make Ippolit available to the rest of the world. I can not read and understand the b-code snippets presented on their site and no one else has been able to understand it enough to create a working engine from it, so it makes perfect sense to have created the Ippolit.c source file for dissemination. We do not know exactly how that was done, but my guess is that the b-code compiler does not create binaries directly. Rather, it could produce assembler code that was translated to C or just produce the C code directly. If the C code was produced directly it is most likely in Russian. It would then have had its variable names translated to English. That was very nice of them!

The harm has been done between the members here and will most likely be around for a long time. We should, however, forgive, forget and carry on as if none of this ever happened. It is easy for me as I never hold a grudge.

Normally, those who blindly classified Ippolit as a reverse-engineered Rybka would now be expected to simply apologize for the mess they have caused. However, if you know them well enough, expect no apologies. BB's unbelievably detailed report is proof only to those who have been genuinely seeking to know the truth.

Matthias.

[M ANSARI]

I don't see where you get that Ippolit has nothing to do with R3 ... I mean really. When BB was posting in rybkaforum I had several interactions with him there and he seemed to definitely think that Ippolit had something to do with R3. As a matter of fact he said something like "I find it impossible to think that the "cloners" didn't reverse-engineer R3". I also remember reading here that Zack thinks that Ippolit strength comes from Rybka 3. So please don't start this BS that Ippolit is an original engine that had nothing to do with R3. With regard to BB many posts on rybkaforum, it is clear that he thought that Ippolit came from R3 but he left open the possibility that it could have been legal because it was through disassembly and not exact copying. So the issue should be whether Ippolit is a legal derivative of R3 or if there is not enough difference and thus it should be labeled a clone ... so please stop disseminating BS that it has "nothing" to do with R3 as that is clearly not BB's opinion nor Zack's.

[Matthias Gemuh]

I don't see where you get that Ippolit has nothing to do with R3 ... I mean really. When BB was posting in rybkaforum I had several interactions with him there and he seemed to definitely think that Ippolit had something to do with R3. As a matter of fact he said something like "I find it impossible to think that the "cloners" didn't reverse-engineer R3". I also remember reading here that Zack thinks that Ippolit strength comes from Rybka 3. So please don't start this BS that Ippolit is an original engine that had nothing to do with R3. With regard to BB many posts on rybkaforum, it is clear that he thought that Ippolit came from R3 but he left open the possibility that it could have been legal because it was through disassembly and not exact copying. So the issue should be whether Ippolit is a legal derivative of R3 or if there is not enough difference and thus it should be labeled a clone ... so please stop disseminating BS that it has "nothing" to do with R3 as that is clearly not BB's opinion nor Zack's.

Just one question: Have you read his 33-page report ?

.

[Albert Silver]

I don't see where you get that Ippolit has nothing to do with R3 ... I mean really. When BB was posting in rybkaforum I had several interactions with him there and he seemed to definitely think that Ippolit had something to do with R3. As a matter of fact he said something like "I find it impossible to think that the "cloners" didn't reverse-engineer R3". I also remember reading here that Zack thinks that Ippolit strength comes from Rybka 3. So please don't start this BS that Ippolit is an original engine that had nothing to do with R3. With regard to BB many posts on rybkaforum, it is clear that he thought that Ippolit came from R3 but he left open the possibility that it could have been legal because it was through disassembly and not exact copying. So the issue should be whether Ippolit is a legal derivative of R3 or if there is not enough difference and thus it should be labeled a clone ... so please stop disseminating BS that it has "nothing" to do with R3 as that is clearly not BB's opinion nor Zack's.

It isn't conclusive when it comes to comparing the two, and the result seems more a debate than a report. For example, he states, "I would find it wholly plausible that IPPOLIT is a reverse-engineered Rybka with many changes". This basically says that he doesn't exclude this at all. I'm sure the programmers will have a ball studying and discussing its contents, but I saw nothing that established the outcome one way or the other.

[M ANSARI]

Can you show me where in the 33 page report it says that Ippolit came from "russian b code" and had nothing to do with R3. Unless the author had a dramatic change of opinion recently, I think he was trying to point out that while Ippolit most definitely is related to Rybka 3, the code was changed enough to discard the "clone" tag. "it is impossible that it is NOT disassembled R3 code" is a pretty strong and confident statement. I saw nothing about "russian b code" as being the original source but only comparisons to how things in Ippolit work when compared to Rybka 3. So again, stop the "russian b code" crap ... I know about the decemberist revolution logic etc ... but really give it a break!

[Werewolf]

Can you show me where in the 33 page report it says that Ippolit came from "russian b code" and had nothing to do with R3. Unless the author had a dramatic change of opinion recently, I think he was trying to point out that while Ippolit most definitely is related to Rybka 3, the code was changed enough to discard the "clone" tag. "it is impossible that it is NOT disassembled R3 code" is a pretty strong and confident statement. I saw nothing about "russian b code" as being the original source but only comparisons to how things in Ippolit work when compared to Rybka 3. So again, stop the "russian b code" crap ... I know about the decemberist revolution logic etc ... but really give it a break!

Yes agreed. Most likely scenario: they took the R3 code and made a ton of changes.

[Matthias Gemuh]

Can you show me where in the 33 page report it says that Ippolit came from "russian b code" and had nothing to do with R3. Unless the author had a dramatic change of opinion recently, I think he was trying to point out that while Ippolit most definitely is related to Rybka 3, the code was changed enough to discard the "clone" tag. "it is impossible that it is NOT disassembled R3 code" is a pretty strong and confident statement. I saw nothing about "russian b code" as being the original source but only comparisons to how things in Ippolit work when compared to Rybka 3. So again, stop the "russian b code" crap ... I know about the decemberist revolution logic etc ... but really give it a break!

Yes agreed. Most likely scenario: they took the R3 code and made a ton of changes.

It should be clear to every programmer that to start with R3 and then make not only that amount of changes but those _types_ of changes is harder than carefully studying R3 and then writing everything from scratch. The _types_ of changes would otherwise necessitate revisiting every single line of the reverse-engineered work, defeating the purpose of avoiding writing from scratch.
BTW, the types of changes make it clear that whoever would do it, is capable of writing Ippolit from scratch.

Anybody who can't understand that much should better quit discussing this topic.

Matthias.

[Thomas Mayer]

Hi Matthias,

Normally, those who blindly classified Ippolit as a reverse-engineered Rybka would now be expected to simply apologize for the mess they have caused. However, if you know them well enough, expect no apologies. BB's unbelievably detailed report is proof only to those who have been genuinely seeking to know the truth.

well, first of all, like with all documents, one have to be careful, I mean there is nearly no code comparison or whatever so like with all other statements about the topic we have to trust in the author.

But of course, how likely is it that someone would create such a 33 page report just for fun ? Not very likely. To compare this all with just objdump, chapeau !
Therefor I tend to agree that it's well possible that they re-engineered parts of Rybka, but it looks like most of the code is original, using ideas of Rybka, ideas of other engines and ideas of it's own. This would make Ippolit and all it's follow-ups absolutely legal and even morally safe. For a final conclusion I would like to wait whether Vas can come up with something different, but for now I want to say sorry to the unknown authors. You might say this is just a apologize light - and you are right, but understand me that I want to wait for a statement of Vas, after that I might make a clearer statement. But I wont wait forever, let's say about a month, after that I would even allow them in official tournaments if they would come up with a real name. (E.g. if Norman or Mr. Houdart would like to take part they would need the permission of the Ippolit authors according to ICGA rules)

Greets, Thomas

[Olivier Deville]

If the C code was produced directly it is most likely in Russian. It would then have had its variable names translated to English. That was very nice of them!

The first Ippolit source that I have read was in Russian.

Olivier