Rebel wrote: That you fight a lost battle like the music and video industry. You can't beat the clones with old rules not fit to stand the pressure anno 2011. That is better to do something now that you still have influence then to wait the problem to grow above your head and then realize you have lost with no influence at all.
It's a matter of vision. But if you want to live in the pre-internet past go ahead. It's mainly the old 80's and 90's generation that want to put their head in the sand.
bob wrote:  SO we can't defeat the terrorists outright. We should give up.
 We can't stop copying completely, so we should just open the floodgates and let everyone copy and enter.
 What a wonderful world you must live in. The music and video industries are hardly "losing" their battles. They are fighting on behalf of the artists making the videos or music. As they should.
1. You want to label the new guy Roberto Munter a terrorist for not willing to reinvent dozens of wheels and being honest about that ?
2. You know
I don't want that. http://www.top-5000.nl/rule2.htm
3. You should take a look at youtube. You find everything. The music and movie industry are helpless. They have given up on youtube long time ago defeated by volume. These are the days of internet, it has come with new realities.
Bob, as 63 year old you certainly must know that to win a fight you can not win is to give up the lost fight and look for alternatives. I would not have said that 3-4 months ago but I foresee that before 2020 the situation will be drastically different as the new generation will take over, that's for sure. We are living now in a transition period, a fight between the old 80's and 90's pre-internet generation and the new 2005+ generation and it's better to give up now and find new solutions than being excluded from the innovatory process and laughed at for not recognizing the inevitable.
Also... one might wonder living in a world with strong source code all over the internet just a few mouse clicks away if it is reasonable to demand new chess programmers to write everything from scratch (because we had to!!) while at the same time it is allowed for the established programmers to freely take from Rybka's legacy of 400 elo points and never mention it. It's too bizarre for words and hypocritical. It's much better to have a transparent CC world with new rules, whatever those rules will be eventually.
Seriously, the time will come the new generation of chess programmers will give us oldies the middle finger for not using what's freely available blocking progress. We would like as those farmers refusing to use milk machines and go bankrupt for not recognizing the times.
Also put yourself in their shoes as an 20 year young university student anno 2011 fascinated by CC, would you start from scratch because a couple of old men want that ?
and now there's the incredible open-source/public domain IvanHoe (www.ippolit.wikispaces
development ongoing for 2.5 years now
the program has grown from a basic skeleton engine to a full-featured analysis tool
they have added feature after feature...including many original technical innovations
Windows and Linux support
unique SMP code,
sophisticated hashing options,
Large page/slab memory,
Eval and Material explanation modes,
chess 960 support,
a complete bitbase solution that surpasses Nalimov EGTB,
Gaviota TB support,
and for selfishly sharing this tremendous program and great CC progress...normally we must (should!) thank a group of Russia/Italian/Albanian programmers, and the Decembrists:
Yakov Petrovich Golyadkin, Igor Igorovich Igoronov, Roberto Pescatore Yusuf Ralf Weisskopf, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar plus Decembrists (all)...
but instead, (paradoxically), the program is arbitrarily blacklisted by the misguided abd uninformed amateur 'good old boy' testing groups: CCRL, CEGT, abd IPON!
Interestingly enough, many believe Rybka 4 benefited (took many things?) from the publication of strong IvanHoe
and according to Richard Vida (who has decompiled significant portions both programs):
it appears the establishment 'hero' Vas R. has liberally availed himself of this tremendous 'Ippolit' resource (like many others) with the release of Rybka 4:
"It is too soon to draw any conclusions but to my surprise R4/IPPO similarity is far greater than R3/IPPO. R4 was released quite a bit after IPPO, so one my draw (very wild) conclusions."
"As for IPPOLIT... It seems that the authors took a special care not to copy anything literally. As I mentioned earlier, I am now digging into R3 internals, and the deeper I go the more I am convinced that IPPOLIT was written from scratch (although with heavy R3 influence)"
http://open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=5 ... 124#p13124
Clearly, this 'extreme right' entrenched CCC establishment has a singular interest: to preserve their embedded power/influence, i.e. 'status quo' at all cost,
hence the 'blacklisting' of Ippolit...
fortunately, we must be patient...we all know this abuse of influence is ultimately in vain, and ultimately change is inevitable.
Thanks for communicating that so aptly!