bob wrote:
Norman, give it a rest. IP*/Robo* are _clearly_ clones of something, produced by decompiling something.
Bob...
"If" (and that's a big 'if') Ippolit is the result of 'decompiling' (as you seem to somehow know as fact):
Decompiling is not 'wrong' or 'illegal' in any way...
it is a completely legitimate form of discovery...(according to the US Supreme Court)
It's no different than taking something apart to see how it works...
(this is the epitome of human curiosity and the basis of enormous amounts of technological progress...)
It's discovering 'ideas'...it is not 'copying'!
The source code has to be recreated, and doing this is a major major task that requires a seriously skilled engineer.
(and you know that!)
bob wrote:
I thought it was "spot on" myself. Nicely done, HGM.
bob wrote:
There are plenty of original programs. Just because you are incapable of writing something original doesn't mean others can't and haven't...
?
The fact that you feel the need to jump on the 'personal insult' bandwagon because I post something you disagree with is really sad...(pitiful).
Writing what conforms to your strict academic definition of an 'original' program does not interest me...
i.e. it is not the 'end all' and goal of chess programming...
my interest is working to improve existing code, pushing the envelope of chess playing programs...and I have successfully done that.
I (and many others) am not at all interested in suscribing to you narrow-minded and vain idea that the only worthwhile goal is to create something absolutely new, original, like a Hemmingway novel.
Sorry that's utter nonsense.
Besides, there are hundreds of absolutely mediocre ('crappy') and boring 'original' programs..who the hell needs another?
And to suggest I'm not capable is simply a low blow...
another of the many insults I've endured from the self-absorbed, ego-centric, puritanical, and contemptuous Talkchess establishment.
The work I've done on RobboLito, Igorrit, Fire, etc... speaks for itself.
It's unfortunate that you have no clue about (or refuse to recognize) the quality and quantity of work I've done on these (and other) now state-of-the-art programs
(all of which make Crafty look like a patzer BTW)
It seems clear that (as your career winds down), your only goal is to discredit as many programs and authors as possible in order to inflate and cement Crafty's legacy.
Norm