Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

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

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Locked
Damir
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 2:53 pm
Location: Denmark
Full name: Damir Desevac

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Damir » Tue Feb 07, 2012 8:39 pm

bob wrote:
Damir wrote:Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?
16 people voted. I believe that only 3 were potential "competitors", that is, affiliated with a commercial computer chess program. So how does 3 out of 16 match up with your statement? What about the other 13 who are not competitors, some of which have been inactive in computer chess for 20+ years???
I just looked who is in charge of ICGA panel, and it appears to be one of Vas main competitors, who more than just once on countless occasions wanted legally to prevent Rybka from participating in important events, by hardware restrictions&uniformed hardware you name it...

It says all and everything about this ICGA panel, who is about to decide Vas further involvment in computer chess.

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1842
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Harvey Williamson » Tue Feb 07, 2012 8:44 pm

Damir wrote:it appears to be one of Vas main competitors, who more than just once on countless occasions wanted legally to prevent Rybka from participating
How would that stop Rybka taking part?

User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:04 am

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Rebel » Tue Feb 07, 2012 8:59 pm

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
bob wrote:Just disingenuous...
That's a nice english word to remember.

Let's recap, you made an accusation, in response you were given a look into a private discussion and now you bombard that as feigned?

That's pretty confusing.
During the questioning David asked Fred who was setting the questions as we spotted 'your english' he assured us you were not involved.
Well, he is correct. I contributed one question. We will see tomorrow if it was given value.
lol you were not involved but you contributed and obviously know what is in tomorrows article.
No, I don't. But I have a good guess. Don't be childish now.

bob
Posts: 20885
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by bob » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:01 pm

marcelk wrote:
bob wrote:
Damir wrote:Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?
16 people voted. I believe that only 3 were potential "competitors", that is, affiliated with a commercial computer chess program. So how does 3 out of 16 match up with your statement? What about the other 13 who are not competitors, some of which have been inactive in computer chess for 20+ years???
An outsider can reverse the question: why where those "3" needed when there were that many others at hand?
We wanted the most qualified people we could find. If the commercial authors were eliminated, the next step would be the amateur authors, I mean we do enter chess tournaments and Rybka could be there, correct? And then after we eliminate the commercial and amateur authors, we have to eliminate ANY potential chess programmer, because if they were to write a program, then they would likely compete, and have that "conflict of interests" issue as well.

This is all simply a red-herring. You REALLY think I would let a commercial author convince me to vote for something I didn't believe, or not vote for something I did believe? That is, quite simply, nonsense.

Either those "3" were indispensable, but then the others don't matter other than confirm the findings and bump up the vote count. A sign of weakness by itself. Or the "3" wouldn't bring in anything additional crucial know-how and could have been easily recused. A sign of strength.

Would the investigation outcome be different without the "3"...?
Nope. We just would have had 13 voting rather than 16. 13 voting "he broke the rules" as opposed to 16. Would that matter?

Removal of any hint of impartiality is such a valuable first step with big dividends. It would have saved the fora of hundreds of messages about that sub-topic alone, everyone's effort spent on some more constructive endeavors for example.
So long as Rybka was found guilty, no "posts" would have been saved. The Rybka Forum folks would have howled long and loud, just as they did with the current panel. This was not about the panel, or the people involved, nor the evidence presented, it was ONLY about the verdict... And unless the verdict was different, the discussions would have been exactly the same.

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1842
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Harvey Williamson » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:01 pm

Rebel wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
bob wrote:Just disingenuous...
That's a nice english word to remember.

Let's recap, you made an accusation, in response you were given a look into a private discussion and now you bombard that as feigned?

That's pretty confusing.
During the questioning David asked Fred who was setting the questions as we spotted 'your english' he assured us you were not involved.
Well, he is correct. I contributed one question. We will see tomorrow if it was given value.
lol you were not involved but you contributed and obviously know what is in tomorrows article.
No, I don't. But I have a good guess. Don't be childish now.
You posted here that it will be published tomorrow. I was only aware it would be soon and expected it today. You really are a liar.

bob
Posts: 20885
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by bob » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:03 pm

Damir wrote:
bob wrote:
Damir wrote:Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?
16 people voted. I believe that only 3 were potential "competitors", that is, affiliated with a commercial computer chess program. So how does 3 out of 16 match up with your statement? What about the other 13 who are not competitors, some of which have been inactive in computer chess for 20+ years???
I just looked who is in charge of ICGA panel, and it appears to be one of Vas main competitors, who more than just once on countless occasions wanted legally to prevent Rybka from participating in important events, by hardware restrictions&uniformed hardware you name it...

It says all and everything about this ICGA panel, who is about to decide Vas further involvment in computer chess.
SO? The secretariat was composed of three chess programmers. Ever seen ME serve as a proponent for "uniform platform" or "hardware limitations?" Of course not. So why does that matter at all? Has nothing to do with violating rules or copying code...

BTW "more than just once" and "countless occasions" do not go together. There have not been "countless occasions where uniform platform was proposed."

User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:04 am

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Rebel » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:06 pm

bob wrote: You implied you had no involvement.
You implied I dictated Frederic the questions. As if that is real. Don't be stupid now.

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1842
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Harvey Williamson » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:08 pm

Rebel wrote:
bob wrote: You implied you had no involvement.
You implied I dictated Frederic the questions. As if that is real. Don't be stupid now.
ah well good to know that Frederic lied to david when he stated you were not involved.

User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:04 am

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Rebel » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:14 pm

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
bob wrote:Just disingenuous...
That's a nice english word to remember.

Let's recap, you made an accusation, in response you were given a look into a private discussion and now you bombard that as feigned?

That's pretty confusing.
During the questioning David asked Fred who was setting the questions as we spotted 'your english' he assured us you were not involved.
Well, he is correct. I contributed one question. We will see tomorrow if it was given value.
lol you were not involved but you contributed and obviously know what is in tomorrows article.
No, I don't. But I have a good guess. Don't be childish now.
You posted here that it will be published tomorrow. I was only aware it would be soon and expected it today. You really are a liar.
Correct. I was informed when part-1 was published and that part-2 was scheduled for wednesday.

User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:04 am

Re: Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

Post by Rebel » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:26 pm

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Rebel wrote:
bob wrote: You implied you had no involvement.
You implied I dictated Frederic the questions. As if that is real. Don't be stupid now.
ah well good to know that Frederic lied to david when he stated you were not involved.
I wasn't. You were given transparency here:

http://74.220.23.57/forum/viewtopic.php?p=448668#448668

Instead of appreciating the openness you exploit it with filthiness for your own purposes.

You know what?

I think you and Bob KNOW what's coming tomorrow.

It would explain a lot.

Locked