BB+ on the matter

[beram]

To get a clean thread on the matter what BB states about R3 and Ippolit I copied this from the original thread http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 41&t=36829 from where this discussion started with M Ansari. Don't blame me on copy pasting this stuff... but it find it most interesting

As my R3/IPPOLIT report seems to be being used in the kangaroo courts of TalkChess, perhaps I should comment:
M ANSARI: You ask "where is the proof" that they are clones ... I think the best proof is the BB report.

That's a fairly jaundiced view of the report. Maybe if "clones" were put in inverted commas I could agree. I interpret the word "clone" rather strictly, and by that measure,
R3 and IPPOLIT don't come remotely close to such a descriptor. The word "derivative" has a technical quasi-legal meaning that I prefer to avoid (similarly with "code") -- by the traditional standards of computer chess, I would say that R3/IPPOLIT and Fruit/R1 are essentially on the same footing [qualitatively, and as I say, quantitatively it can depend on your metric], in that both R1 and IPPOLIT re-use a substantial quantity of specifics of the respective pre-cursors. [The fact that Fruit was "free and open source" and R3 a "commercial product" is not relevant to me -- there are a number of dissenters in the intellectual property world, but the more common opinion is that once software is obtained legally, an end-user can use it for the purposes of discovery unless there is an agreement to the contrary]

[Graham Banks]

Who is BB? Too many people like to hide behind anonymity, which doesn't do a lot for their credibility. Just my opinion.

[OliverUwira]

He may be anonymous, but he certainly knows what he is talking about. And on top of that, he is very neutral in what he writes.

Unfortunately that is something depressingly rare in this whole debate.

[Steve B]

Who is BB? Too many people like to hide behind anonymity, which doesn't do a lot for their credibility. Just my opinion.

As an aside
i think its funny that "BB" chooses to read this forum and quote this forum and yet answer elsewhere
whats up with that i wonder?
we certainly welcome him to feel free to post here
Steve

[alpha123]

Who is BB? Too many people like to hide behind anonymity, which doesn't do a lot for their credibility. Just my opinion.

Larry Kaufman and Zach Wegner have met him and can vouch for his authenticity. He just prefers to remain anonymous.

Peter

[Dann Corbit]

Who is BB? Too many people like to hide behind anonymity, which doesn't do a lot for their credibility. Just my opinion.

He may be anonymous, but he seems accurate and fair to me.

[Osipov Jury]

Who is BB?

Big Brother.

[Graham Banks]

Who is BB?

Big Brother.

[mhull]

Who is BB? Too many people like to hide behind anonymity, which doesn't do a lot for their credibility. Just my opinion.

You aren't anonymous, but your refusal to read or otherwise consider the tremendous work of analysis done by BB+ in an objective manner hurts your credibility enormously. Just my opinion.

[Dann Corbit]

Who is BB? Too many people like to hide behind anonymity, which doesn't do a lot for their credibility. Just my opinion.

You aren't anonymous, but your refusal to read or otherwise consider the tremendous work of analysis done by BB+ in an objective manner hurts your credibility enormously. Just my opinion.

There is a lot of smoke and fire on this issue, with many intelligent people taking stands on both sides of the battle lines.

I don't think that Graham is any more unreasonable than those who take the militant opposite stance.

Personally, I want to stand in the middle and try to examine the facts objectively. However, we should all admit that everyone on earth sees things through the colored lenses of their own particular experiences and therefore what I see as rosy-pink is clearly blue-green to someone else.

IMO-YMMV