Peter Berger wrote:This discussion about engine originality has been going on for years now with no acceptable decision and solution found.
I liked a little thing Chris Whittington posted in one of the more technical threads a few days ago ( quote from memory): „Let's keep this discussion slow, so that the lays can follow. Ultimately it's them who decide.“
Of course I am aware of the irony here
, but actually he is absolutely right about this in my opinion.
In the meantime the ICGA tournaments have lost all the credibility they used to have with the chess public in the past. Why? Because of the „known“ clones? If yes, then only in a very roundabout way.
The main problem is that everyone can just download some free engine from the Internet that's most probably stronger than any „world champion“ according to the ICGA.
If you read „New in Chess“ e.g. all the top grandmasters use Houdini or Stockfish for their game comments, and it is obvious that they couldn't care less about the clone discussions or who the world champion is – they care about the quality of the chess analysis they get.
If there was like one or two obvious offenders only - and everony else was absolutely „clean“, you could explain this to the people easily and make them care. E.g. people grudgingly accepted that Ben Johnson was no olympic champion in the 100 meters run as he was doped and you could make them believe the others weren't.
In a similar way you could easily explain to people the case of Gunda ( someone just changing the name of the engine and some strings and claiming it to be his own).
And if someone just blindly copied something relevant verbatim in a most obvious way and this was still kind of unsual in the competitive environment, you can get people to accept that this is cheating.
But the current reality in computerchess land is different. All the „original“ authors seem to cheat too ( at least if you look at it from a layman's point of view). It would be most easy to dig up zillions of messages here of „original“ authors who discuss reverse engineering other engines to find ideas they can implement in their own engines . Some – like the Komodo author – even make progress reports how some idea of someone else kind of works for him and some others don't.
The current situation in computerchess land is basically like the Tour de France IMHO. Everyone knows that like everybody else is doped – and that the only thing that matters is that some cyclist doesn't get caught for him to have a chance to be competitive.
So people stopped to care about the Tour de France.
If you wanted to still have a programmer competition to be credible to the public, you'd probably have to make it „Open Source“with loads of code checks only This might at least work for some time ( it won't work in the long run though - as the ideas happen to be out there).
Or you stop demanding originality ( you will still want to keep some basic rules even the , to avoid too blatant cases of copying but you lower the current demands for „original programs“).
But if say Junior became world champion beating Houdini and Rybka in the tournament, the chess public would care.
It won't if Junior beats Crafty to become world champion.
I see no possibility to work around this problem, as if nothing had happened.
Peter
I saw your article just right now, so excuse please the delay. Perhaps I have explanation and solution for your problem.
But let me first remember my first time in the internet computerchess. I was already very old then that was one aspect and then I came out of a naively theoretical and academic ethical sphere. Soon I found out that there was a visible because open split into parties led by different business companies. Imediately I was accused for lying and espionage. For the "other" side of the guy I was talking to. At the instant I chose to make it a total game by pretending that I were 22. In fact I had my 23 rd birthday at the time on the net. Nobody doubted me anymore. Nobody, really none accused me of faking my age because for 22 I just knew too much, but apparently my bad English hid the truth for most readers.
Why did I start a veritable war on Ed with his Rebel company? Unbelievable but from my view as academic I simply found it a cheat to just do business as usual and make some attractions to get potential customers. You might laugh but this is why I hated Ed. So, in terms of normal people without a sensible reason at all. But I had my guidelines.
My solution for your problem is if we returned to academic ethics and guidelines.
Just to shorten this, I jump to the next point. All critiques of Vas who has a veritable degree in computer sciences of the MIT one of the best institution in the USA, came from lays, wannabe academics aka fools or deceived potential academics but no true academic not to speak of highest ranks like professors. Only exception Hyatt. (obsessed)
Next point. Academia isnt free or sane of cheats and fraud. Trivially those who have defined the rules are nothing smarter or less evil as human beings than the potential academics.
There is no human life without trust and confidence into the righteousness of things in the real world. But surprise, also the real world as we live it is man-made. Everywhere people have made their social rules. That's so interesting to experience foreign rules if you go abroad on a visit. It were much more difficult if you decided to emigrate.
Now my solution. The rise into academic heights is combined with ethical education because you must always pass the examinations step after step. Only few amokers remain undetected. Or better said from a certain level upward you cant make serious controls. Because of the funny you know that I know that you know etc. This is called freedom of mind.
I see Vas innocent mainly for the reason because with his talent he didnt need to cheat. But I know that the rules of the ICGA are no way sufficient to exclude cheats. And after passing the checks at MIT I am certain that it was no problem for Vas to avoid difficulties in ICGA.
Only danger came with Hyatt obsessed. Someone who day and d night is on a FBI raid, being executioneer and everything. The rest is history.
You might ask me if I really believed that academics are all honest and sober? Yes and no. No, because we are all too human. Many already cheated in the dissertation - we had the topic during the past two years. Many have money and buy training hours and therefore pass the examinations but not because they are more talented than others. It's just that they spend time and money to become familiar with the field thex had chosen. Bob Hyatt is a good example. He almost spent 20 years in a sphere and was finally promoted but I swear, you had also made the same career, Peter. It's always the same being there having done that before. It's like living in a street. In ten years you know a whole quartier.
In that understanding what is cheating?
It was a very early statement of Vas, that the rules in ICGA were imperfect or nonexisting. How serious you can take it?
Normally you dont expect the institution that has no clear rules to suddenly allow or incite an evil hate campaign like the dirty panel.
I feel sorry for David, whose kingdom has been destroyed by his own overreaction with the lifetime ban of Vas.
If the few academics had united and decided that they would continue the show but therefore would exclude everything criminal like these stealers and unknown publishers. Of course the ICGA couldnt forbid stealing and crimes but they could have declared that they would simply ignore such acticvities - but not those of their best talent, Vas Rajlich. Of course that would require that Bob Hyatt would become unobsessed and decent. He is a nice guy but when his tender spot is touched... well! You know what I mean. It's just the human drama.
