mjlef wrote:One issue is what to do AFTER a tournament. Once everyone has left and the winners announced, how to recitify things if a program is later accused or proven to be a clone/theft/etc.? I think the ICGA members realize detecting these clones is hard work and requires special skills. Skills even some programmers do not have.
I think all events ICGA sponsors should require saving a copy of each program executable, in case accusations arise later.
Forcing programmers to reveal source code is an often difficult task. People do not want their "secrets" revealed to others. And who could be trusted with this, and more importantly, have the skills to analyze the code? As I recall, several porgammers were given access to Strelka code early on, and they all determined it was original. When I finially saw it in later versions, it looked very much like an optimized Fruit. I think the only people who could notice these things are the few select people that have reviewed the source code of many open programs. I certainly would have not noticed Fruit similarities unless I was already very familiar with Fruit.
OK, so this is really not Rybka specific....its just that recent events are causing them to re-evaluate their process (like the post-tournament revelation that NOW had been cloned).
BubbaTough wrote:I guess I don't understand the fuss. Don't they already have a system in place? If they suspect things are wrong, they ask for source of the version requesting permission to compete. If they don't get the source, the engine cannot compete. If they do, they send it for expert opinion (in this case people like Bob and Don). Why all this fuss? Procedures are in place, follow the procedures. Are they just trying to decide whether there is sufficient justification to ask for the source code?
-Sam
Both I believe. And the general idea is to set up an organizational entity charged with answering questions about whether this or that engine is legitimate or not...
At the moment, they have the policy part, but not the evaluation mechanism. This is an attempt to define the evaluation mechanism.
mjlef wrote:One issue is what to do AFTER a tournament. Once everyone has left and the winners announced, how to recitify things if a program is later accused or proven to be a clone/theft/etc.? I think the ICGA members realize detecting these clones is hard work and requires special skills. Skills even some programmers do not have.
I think all events ICGA sponsors should require saving a copy of each program executable, in case accusations arise later.
Forcing programmers to reveal source code is an often difficult task. People do not want their "secrets" revealed to others. And who could be trusted with this, and more importantly, have the skills to analyze the code? As I recall, several porgammers were given access to Strelka code early on, and they all determined it was original. When I finially saw it in later versions, it looked very much like an optimized Fruit. I think the only people who could notice these things are the few select people that have reviewed the source code of many open programs. I certainly would have not noticed Fruit similarities unless I was already very familiar with Fruit.
More importantly, is the source they provide the same as the executable they used? This requires validation as well.
bob wrote:
David contacted me about the issue and about the tribunal idea. The goal is not to provide court cases, but to decide whether a program should be allowed to compete in CC events...
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
a decision by the ICGA that only deals with future events and at the same time leaves past WCCC titles to remain as they are now.. will not be a fair result
IMHO Regards
Steve
Steve B wrote:
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
The first Rybka 1 beta that is always compared with Fruit has never won a title championship, in Torino it already was Rybka 2.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
Steve B wrote:
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
The first Rybka 1 beta that is always compared with Fruit has never won a title championship, in Torino it already was Rybka 2.
Surely the ICGA would not go to the trouble of a Tribunal and then turn a blind eye to the past championships?
the idea that Rybka 2 is a totally different engine then Rybka 1 beta is silly
it might make for great endless discussions on public forums like this..but its not a reasonable position for a tribunal of fact to take
Steve
Steve B wrote:
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
The first Rybka 1 beta that is always compared with Fruit has never won a title championship, in Torino it already was Rybka 2.
Surely the ICGA would not go to the trouble of a Tribunal and then turn a blind eye to the past championships?
the idea that Rybka 2 is a totally different engine then Rybka 1 beta is silly
it might make for great endless discussions on public forums like this..but its not a reasonable position for a tribunal of fact to take
Steve
Wasn't the 1st win in Paderborn in Dec 2005 just after the 1.0 beta release.?
Steve B wrote:
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
The first Rybka 1 beta that is always compared with Fruit has never won a title championship, in Torino it already was Rybka 2.
Surely the ICGA would not go to the trouble of a Tribunal and then turn a blind eye to the past championships?
the idea that Rybka 2 is a totally different engine then Rybka 1 beta is silly
it might make for great endless discussions on public forums like this..but its not a reasonable position for a tribunal of fact to take
Steve
Wasn't the 1st win in Paderborn in Dec 2005 just after the 1.0 beta release.?
not sure if the Paderborn tournament is under ICGA auspices
i am basically referring to the WCCC events from 2007-2010 that Rybka competed in and won the Title of WCCCC Champion
those titles are now under a dark cloud and need to be re-awarded to the 2nd place finishers depending on the outcome of the tribunals decision
i suppose organizers of every event that Rybka ever competed in might want to re-visit the events that they have jurisdiction over and also strip Rybka of 1st place finishes again depending on the results of the ICGA's inquiry
Regards
Steve
Steve B wrote:
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
The first Rybka 1 beta that is always compared with Fruit has never won a title championship, in Torino it already was Rybka 2.
Surely the ICGA would not go to the trouble of a Tribunal and then turn a blind eye to the past championships?
the idea that Rybka 2 is a totally different engine then Rybka 1 beta is silly
it might make for great endless discussions on public forums like this..but its not a reasonable position for a tribunal of fact to take
Steve
Hello Steve, I must object: David Levy just discovered the Internet, mastered e-mail and has learned to write blogs. Now you want him to preside on tribunals, to inspect the sources of all the runners up in the last WCCCs, do you trust him to determine if they were fully original. Just to be fair. I am willing to believe HIARCS is fully original and that the traces of the BASIC program that Mark Uniacke started out with are still in there. I am willing to say the same about Rebel from Ed Schröder -and by the way I don't think Rebel Ed would submit his sources ever again, and would Mark Uniacke?- although not much of the BASIC Rebel would still be recognizable, because Ed rewrote everything in assembler. That already makes things infinitely more complicated. How many programmers can read assembler these days? Not even Yuri Osipov could dissassemble an assembly program. He said so himself
Please it's not my call at all, but one would prefer if there were not too many tribunals installed...
Regards, Eelco
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan
Steve B wrote:
hopefully also under consideration by the ICGA tribunal will be past WCCC events that Rybka participated in and won
the ICGA does have jurisdiction over its own events
it seems to me that if it is decided that Rybka violated the GPL and is Derived from Fruit and therefore ineligible to compete in future events..then it follows that Rybka should be stripped of the title of World Champion in every WCCC event it competed in and won..and second place finishers in those years need to be awarded the title
The first Rybka 1 beta that is always compared with Fruit has never won a title championship, in Torino it already was Rybka 2.
Surely the ICGA would not go to the trouble of a Tribunal and then turn a blind eye to the past championships?
the idea that Rybka 2 is a totally different engine then Rybka 1 beta is silly
it might make for great endless discussions on public forums like this..but its not a reasonable position for a tribunal of fact to take
Steve
Wasn't the 1st win in Paderborn in Dec 2005 just after the 1.0 beta release.?
not sure if the Paderborn tournament is under ICGA auspices
i am basically referring to the WCCC events from 2007-2010 that Rybka competed in and won the Title of WCCCC Champion
those titles are now under a dark cloud and need to be re-awarded to the 2nd place finishers depending on the outcome of the tribunals decision
i suppose organizers of every event that Rybka ever competed in might want to re-visit the events that they have jurisdiction over and also strip Rybka of 1st place finishes again depending on the results of the ICGA's inquiry
Regards
Steve
He did compete in the WCCC before 2007 as Rajlich changing the name getting him out of paying! Matbe all the major tournaments should be played under ICGA guidance so that all fall under one code.
