TalkChess.com

playjunior wrote:Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

Osipov Jury wrote: Is it also plagiarism?

Laskos wrote: Wow, your graphs are almost identical to mine, therefore we can cross-check our results. I will stick to "Average Linkage between Groups" and "Pearson correlation (bivariate correlations) measure", as these give me the more stable results over all the range, from main branches to individual engines.
I added Crafty 20.14 and some claimed to be related to it engines, and, as expected, they seem indeed related . Now the Crafty family is represented as well. My Crafty test was a pain, with a very slow WB2UCI interface, it took me 5 hours to test Crafty at 100 ms.



A and B are two groups of very unrelated engines. Group A might be related in some degree to Fruit. Group B seems not related at all to Fruit (if the Fruit hypothesis stands). Crafty, Fruit 2.1, and Rybka 3 families are named.

Kai

Osipov Jury wrote:

bob wrote: Students are quite good at this kind of obfuscation. One can do the above to improve speed (one popcnt vs N BSF instructions in a loop) or to make the code appear to be different (both do the same thing, but look significantly different, particularly if you change the variable names as well...

You are very strong teacher. I would not want to be your student.

Another example. In the function SEE of Ivanhoe, we can find the following:

Code: Select all

  do
    {
      cbf &= ~bit;
      mask = BitboardOppP & bit;
      if (mask)
	{
	  bit ^= (~(mask - 1)) & mask;
	  PieceValue = ValueP;
	}
      else
...

Obviously, this is a mistake. After the capture by a pawn on the open diagonal can be an bishop or a queen. In Houdini this bug is corrected:

Code: Select all

  while (bit & OppOccupied) {
    if (mask = BitboardOppP & bit)
      {
        capture_value += 100;
        if &#40;capture_value < -60&#41; return 0;
        from = first_one&#40;mask&#41;;
        occ &= ClearBit&#91;from&#93;;
        bit &= ClearBit&#91;from&#93;;
        bit |= BMagicAttacks&#91;BishopIndex&#40;to, occ&#41;&#93; & diag & occ;
      &#125;
    else
...

Is it also plagiarism?

bob wrote:

playjunior wrote:Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

How would that help? My email is on the same machine as the master Crafty source...

bob wrote:

playjunior wrote:Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

How would that help? My email is on the same machine as the master Crafty source...

Uri Blass wrote:

bob wrote:

playjunior wrote:Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

How would that help? My email is on the same machine as the master Crafty source...

I do not know about your email but I can check emails in every computer and I only need my username and my passward.

In other words the content of my emails are saved in a different place than my computer.

I use gmail.

playjunior wrote:

bob wrote:

playjunior wrote:Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

How would that help? My email is on the same machine as the master Crafty source...

Send it to a friend or a family member.

bob wrote:I don't use free email machines. Non-secure and I have too many discussions about student grades and such. My email is on my office box for the same security reasons. The US FERPA (Family Educational Right to Privacy Act) is pretty onerous and requires reasonable protection for student discussions. gmail, yahoo, etc do not provide that.

bob wrote:

playjunior wrote:Send it to a friend or a family member.

Which would mean "quantity over quality?"