rbarreira wrote:For now ChessBase is still selling Rybka.
clearly, he can keep selling it.
wouldn't further action would be needed, i.e. an expensive and victorious law suit,
brought by...FSF or Ryan Benitez, or Bob Hyatt for damages...hmmm
loss of income? no i guess not
well who knows?
this however is simply a disqualification from a gaming association, a rather harsh 'slap' on the fanny, and go stand in the corner,
(thanks John Conway for the nice image and apt analogy)
sorry, but it probably won't faze them one bit IMO, and it's clearly a product for which there's a demand.
I noticed in the investigation report that two people from ChessBase were also in the panel:
Albert Silver (software designer for Chess Assistant (1999-2002); currently editor of Chessbase News (2010-present))
Frederic Friedel (Chessbase.com)
It seems they were at least interested in the outcome, what they'll do I don't know.
Neither of us were on the panel. We were merely given access to the forums where the debate and analysis took place.
Then why are they using your name? did you sign or agree on the final report?
Miguel
I was told of the wiki where it was being discussed. When it became evident one had to register and then be accepted in order to access it, that is what I did. I signed nothing, approved nothing. I was not a participant.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
There were some minor problems getting YouTube working, though I managed. I gave up on Google Earth after making my system unbootable trying.
Acceptable to me.
only issue I ever had was resolved when the 64 bit (native) flash player project finally produced something that works... now youtube, jamplay.com (guitar site I visit) and other flash sites work flawlessly.
Perhaps it's not the best day for computer chess, but it can be a good day if the actions taken serve as a positive influence on current and future authors who might otherwise might think that they can easily get away with unauthorized cloning.
The sad thing is that if Bob were asked if parts of Crafty's code could be copied, he probably would have said yes if a reasonable acknowledgement arrangement was made.
Correct. I have given _many_ permission to use the rotated bit-board code in older versions of Crafty. And I explained my reasoning that suggested that such code was OK to borrow. But then again, when someone asked, they included an acknowledgement. Vas claimed _everything_ in his code was original and written by him...
Haha Google "rotated bitboard hyatt" and there you have everything you need to write a rotated bitboard program. Algorithms perfectly described, with lots of code snippets. Almost all "rotated" engines are probably based on that page, maybe except for those few who were too lazy to implement their own code that way, and instead asked you for permission.
Hard to claim copyright on something that you published on the net in such detail.
Sven
I can claim copyright on _anything_ I publish, no matter how widely that gets distributed. That's the point of copyright.
In the case of bitboard code in Rybka, I specifically mentioned the _initialization_ code, which is fairly lengthy and which could be done in thousands of different ways, all correct. And of course, early versions of Crafty had the bits numbered for the Cray (bit 0 = MSB because cray has a count leading zero instruction rather than a bsf/bsr type instruction) rather than the PC, and these were blindly copied, which would not happen if someone took my explanation but wrote the code for themselves...
That link you gave is far from providing the needed code for initialization. And that is the most complex part of the code. The shifts, ANDs and such to extract occupancy bits and then look them up is really quite simple and fast, and easy to write. That's not the part that caught my eye in this investigation.
You are a scientist and i expected a different approach.
For example You prove A using a1,a2,a3 math arguments to do so.
If i take those a1,a2,a3 add b1,b2,b3 to prove A+ which is a better and bigger generalization of Statement A, what does that mean?
You can say that is derived. But everything is derived from something else.
I mean. I start from crafty. I start changinging code to make it a different engine. I am changing everything. Search, evaluation, pruning everthing.
At what point does the transformed code is NOT crafty anymore?
If 2 programs share 5% of code are they "linked"?
I do not think someone can compare Fruit and Rybka 3 as engines. They may share some code parts, but i am sure those parts were considered insignificant and thus where not changed. (i am sure everyone starts coding his chess program that way until you have a program up and running)
if Vas is being 'railroaded' as has repeatedly been stated by at least one well-known member,
then his ultimate vindication is quite simple...
he needs to present source code from any release, preferably several, (beginning from Rajlich 1.6.1 thru 2.3)
privately, behind closed doors, to the ICGA panel of experts.
he has had ample opportunity to do that...he didn't, and he still does not take that step.
that begs the question: why not?
has he lost it all?
and in addition, he says absolutely nothing in defense of the allegations?
kranium wrote:if Vas is being 'railroaded' as has repeatedly been stated by at least one well-known member,
then his ultimate vindication is quite simple...
he needs to present source code from any release, preferably several, (beginning from Rajlich 1.6.1 thru 2.3)
privately, behind closed doors, to the ICGA panel of experts.
he has had ample opportunity to do that...he didn't, and he still does not take that step.
that begs the question: why not?
has he lost it all?
and in addition, he says absolutely nothing in defense of the allegations?
I don't think sending it to the entire panel would be a good idea. But perhaps sending it to a couple of members who have no direct interest. Maybe Thompson and Watkins.
After I posted it I started to hope it wasn't to obscure. Kevin Smith's movies, particularly the first few are chock full of Star Wars references.
