The silence of Robert Houdart

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
Carlos Ylich
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 7:31 pm
Location: Brazil

The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by Carlos Ylich » Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:21 pm

Is the silence of Robert Houdart means it has sold Houdini
ChessBase or is working hard on version 2.0?
:roll:

User avatar
tjfroh
Posts: 8073
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:51 pm
Location: Near the Intel Plant in the Land of Manana
Full name: Timothy Frohlick
Contact:

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by tjfroh » Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:46 pm

Carlos,

Yes. I would capitalize on Houdini. Mr. Houdart is smarter than me.
He will maximize his profits. I would pay up to $150.00 USD for a killer chess program with massive opening books and massive databases.

Tio Timmy
A New Way Comes Upon Earth.
God is an infinitely variable Constant.
Man marks his ground with ideologies.
Galaxies are the dreidels of God.
War is a punishment for implacability.
Peace flows from forgiveness of sins.

gerold
Posts: 10121
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: van buren,missouri

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by gerold » Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:37 am

Carlos Ylich wrote:Is the silence of Robert Houdart means it has sold Houdini
ChessBase or is working hard on version 2.0?
:roll:
Not much from Robert lately. He may be waiting for the outcome of
the Rybka/Fruit thing.
He may be working on a new version. Hope so.

Best,
Gerold.

User avatar
Houdini
Posts: 1471
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by Houdini » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 am

@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert

gerold
Posts: 10121
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: van buren,missouri

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by gerold » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:39 am

Houdini wrote:@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert
Glad to hear your reply Robert. More power to you,

Best,
Gerold.

benstoker
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:05 am

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by benstoker » Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:30 am

Houdini wrote:@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert
Some things we don't know. Other things we do know. And we do know, on the word of Don Dailey, that even if you, Mr. Houdart, muster another +50 ELO out of Houdini 2.0, it won't be the result of any new chess engine ideas you will have created, but just the handiwork of a skilled debugger.

You see, although Komodo is 150 ELO below Houdini, it's 100% "original" as to the 1% of the total code that matters, i.e., approx. 5% of the search() and about 3% of the eval() code. Of course, these days, around 99% of the source code is ministerial in nature, one-input-one-output crap functions, public domain junk like magic bitboards, bit counting asm garbage, etc.

It's a pity that fine debuggers like you don't get as much credit as the guys spinning their wheels creating buggy "original" code comprising just around 1% of the engine.

Robert, you and Don should partner up! Think about it. Do you smell the dollars, the euros?! You could explain to Don and Larry the Ippo* code, and then Don could figure out how to rewrite the code so that it's "original". You follow? Then, you, Robert, debug the holy shit out of Don's original rewrite. Sign a 50/50 partnership agreement, sell through Chessbase and go to the bank!

Albert Silver
Posts: 2828
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by Albert Silver » Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:14 am

benstoker wrote:
Houdini wrote:@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert
Some things we don't know. Other things we do know. And we do know, on the word of Don Dailey, that even if you, Mr. Houdart, muster another +50 ELO out of Houdini 2.0, it won't be the result of any new chess engine ideas you will have created, but just the handiwork of a skilled debugger.

You see, although Komodo is 150 ELO below Houdini, it's 100% "original" as to the 1% of the total code that matters, i.e., approx. 5% of the search() and about 3% of the eval() code. Of course, these days, around 99% of the source code is ministerial in nature, one-input-one-output crap functions, public domain junk like magic bitboards, bit counting asm garbage, etc.

It's a pity that fine debuggers like you don't get as much credit as the guys spinning their wheels creating buggy "original" code comprising just around 1% of the engine.

Robert, you and Don should partner up! Think about it. Do you smell the dollars, the euros?! You could explain to Don and Larry the Ippo* code, and then Don could figure out how to rewrite the code so that it's "original". You follow? Then, you, Robert, debug the holy shit out of Don's original rewrite. Sign a 50/50 partnership agreement, sell through Chessbase and go to the bank!
It is really odd that you insist in lambasting Don's work like this.

Why suggest that only 1% of his work is original, that he wants to rewrite IPPO code, and finally that his programming skills are so poor that they require an outsider to debug them?

What do you have against him?
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."

h1a8
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:23 am

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by h1a8 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:40 am

Houdini wrote:@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert
I can't wait. I love Houdini so much. Thank you Robert for developing it.

benstoker
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:05 am

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by benstoker » Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:44 am

Albert Silver wrote:
benstoker wrote:
Houdini wrote:@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert
Some things we don't know. Other things we do know. And we do know, on the word of Don Dailey, that even if you, Mr. Houdart, muster another +50 ELO out of Houdini 2.0, it won't be the result of any new chess engine ideas you will have created, but just the handiwork of a skilled debugger.

You see, although Komodo is 150 ELO below Houdini, it's 100% "original" as to the 1% of the total code that matters, i.e., approx. 5% of the search() and about 3% of the eval() code. Of course, these days, around 99% of the source code is ministerial in nature, one-input-one-output crap functions, public domain junk like magic bitboards, bit counting asm garbage, etc.

It's a pity that fine debuggers like you don't get as much credit as the guys spinning their wheels creating buggy "original" code comprising just around 1% of the engine.

Robert, you and Don should partner up! Think about it. Do you smell the dollars, the euros?! You could explain to Don and Larry the Ippo* code, and then Don could figure out how to rewrite the code so that it's "original". You follow? Then, you, Robert, debug the holy shit out of Don's original rewrite. Sign a 50/50 partnership agreement, sell through Chessbase and go to the bank!
It is really odd that you insist in lambasting Don's work like this.

Why suggest that only 1% of his work is original, that he wants to rewrite IPPO code, and finally that his programming skills are so poor that they require an outsider to debug them?

What do you have against him?
Albert, take this as your opportunity to, for the very first time, define that word of yours, "original". Start with that.

Peter Skinner
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:49 pm
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Contact:

Re: The silence of Robert Houdart

Post by Peter Skinner » Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:59 am

benstoker wrote:
Houdini wrote:@Carlos, The two options you present are not mutually exclusive :D. But yes, I'm currently working hard on Houdini 2.0.

@Gerold, I'm not in the least influenced by the Fruit/Rybka thing, I have no dealings with the ICGA.

Cheers,
Robert
Some things we don't know. Other things we do know. And we do know, on the word of Don Dailey, that even if you, Mr. Houdart, muster another +50 ELO out of Houdini 2.0, it won't be the result of any new chess engine ideas you will have created, but just the handiwork of a skilled debugger.

You see, although Komodo is 150 ELO below Houdini, it's 100% "original" as to the 1% of the total code that matters, i.e., approx. 5% of the search() and about 3% of the eval() code. Of course, these days, around 99% of the source code is ministerial in nature, one-input-one-output crap functions, public domain junk like magic bitboards, bit counting asm garbage, etc.

It's a pity that fine debuggers like you don't get as much credit as the guys spinning their wheels creating buggy "original" code comprising just around 1% of the engine.

Robert, you and Don should partner up! Think about it. Do you smell the dollars, the euros?! You could explain to Don and Larry the Ippo* code, and then Don could figure out how to rewrite the code so that it's "original". You follow? Then, you, Robert, debug the holy shit out of Don's original rewrite. Sign a 50/50 partnership agreement, sell through Chessbase and go to the bank!
Yes, because that is what _everyone_ wants. To spend hard earned money on re-hashed/debugged code that gives a slight ELO gain.

Do you honestly think that Chessbase or any other company is going to purchase/sell something that is freely available in the public domain?

I'll tell you what. How about I grab the code for Robbolitto, add my name to the UCI string, and you can purchase a copy of "My" program for 300 euro? Maybe 500.. after all I did have to compile it and change some values. Hard work.. and I _deserve_ to be paid for it.

It might be better than the original, it might not. But I am totally willing to sell you it.

I shall call it.. UrMnysMyne 1.0. Deal? I will accept PayPal or direct money transfer. No personal cheques however. I'm sure you understand.

Peter
I got kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bible's to the fiction section.

Post Reply