What's Vasik Rajlich doing today?

[Rebel]

PS: Let's not even mention that this was reported for R1 (because it was Zach's analysis), but for R2 (which is the one that actually played in ICGA) the PSTs changed dramatically. That was not properly acknowledged in the report. It was only hand-waved.

Really.........

Missed that.

[Rebel]

If Rybka 1 have nothing to do with Fruit Vas had six years time to clear the situation.

Okay, this is going to be controversial, can be fun anyway, so let's have it

The right to silence is a fundamental right in court not to incriminate one self, or more subtle in his case not to talk (and explain) about his secrets that put him on top for quite some time. Silence doesn't mean (a sign of) guilt. In the end code decides if he is guilty or not.

Although I never met Vas in person due to my email contacts and his general behaviour in public I learned a bit about how he looks at things and he is not an every day person. Statements like: when I began with chess programming in 2003 I already knew I would go commercial I would dominate the rating lists. Think about that for a moment.

Take for instance the Sven-Vas correspondence about the origin of Ippolit, Sven asking specific questions that would proof Vas' claim Ippolit being Rybka in disguise. You see the same pattern as with the RF case, he doesn't answer Sven and remains vague and in the end you know nothing more than before. This while it was in his own interest to clear the case.

So what goes on in the mind of the person Vasik Raijlich?

Here are some options:

1. From a commercial perspective he doesn't want to give anyone information, not the tiniest bit;

2. He is arrogant, if he states Ippolit=Rybka you just have to believe him, period, likewise in the R/F case;

3. In the end the programmers figured it out themselves, that Ippolit is a Rybka clone and maybe he relied on that in the R/F case;

4. He doesn't trust anyone. Not even me, the latter I know for sure.

So place your bets

Would not be my choice, I would defend myself to death to such slander.

this is bogus. You have a right to avoid self-incrimination. You do NOT have a right to not disclose trade secrets. A judge can, and sometimes will, close the courtroom when such are being discussed. But there is no guaranteed right other than that you do not have to make self-incriminating statements, period.

And that's EXACTLY what Vas asked for, to protect his ideas from his competitors he wrote to David -

Hi David,

I prefer to plead my case with the final arbiter rather than with the accusers.

Re. the schedule - could we have the final hearings in October or November? I'd like to prepare properly, and my schedule is very full until the first week in October.

Best regards,

Vas

Trials generally take days or weeks. Very rarely does one go for a month or longer. There's a reason. Things should be settled as quickly as possible, in order to stifle/limit speculation. 9 months is not exactly a reasonable response, keeping with the "judge" metaphor here. In general, the plaintiff makes there case by presenting their evidence. The defendant then presents his side of the evidence. Immediately, not 9 months later...

Of course the point being was NOT time, that's negotionable. Point is Vas wasn't willing to face a jury who already had made up its mind. He was asking for someone independent. David made it a courtcase, see the correspondence. And there wasn't a selection procedure to rule out jury members with bias.

[hgm]

That analogy is a bit wrong. The investigation was not modeled after a jury trial; there was only one judge, which was David. Who, if anything, had great interest in the verdict being a 'not guilty'.

So it is better to say that Vas was not willing to face the prosecutor and the expert witnesses he called to the stand. "I am not coming to court if you allow this guy in there that accuses me of any crime!"

Well, in a real court refusing to face the prosecutor usually isn't a good strategy for getting acquitted...

[Sedat Canbaz]

I will answer later in the day of your message!
But this one explain my opinion:

Here my view. I have the same as a friendly judge from me. I told him the situation for a while and he have no interest to discuss with me, because after a minute only the situation is more as clear for him. At first, most important are one question only.

Picture for an example:

1. Person A draw a picture

2. Person B have stolen the picture and changed a lot. For looking the picuture all is more nicely. Not important what he do ... selling or not.

3. Not know people "C" have stolen the picuture from person B. Not important free, selling or whatever.

4. Person D repair the mistakes the "unkown group "C" made. Not important what he do, selling, free or whatever.

5. Person E see that and works with the repaired code from Person "D".

6. Others are thinking great ... we can do the same and have stolen the work Person E made or used the work Person D made or used the work the "Unknown Group of Person "C" made.

The Judge answered directly very simple!
For me important is only one question at first. Was the picuture stolen from Person B or not. All others things arn't important at first, because if so ... all others have give his pictures to person A back. Simply, the picture of person A was Copyright. An other question is how big is damage for person A. After this different other things could be interesting.

If the Picture are changed is this much more interesting for him. Not important for him is the picture better or not better. No other person have to changed a Copyright work. I told him, that with changes the Picture is clearly better as before. The judge told me, that isn't important ... the originality was changed and this isn't right.

If such a case goes to a judge ... a big chaos for computer chess. Causal chain running a long time.

My opinion to open sources in chess programming aren't really good. The best way to solved such a problem isn't a judge, the important persons ... Person A and Person B should find a solution. That is most important I think.

I will not have the work from Person C or D or E or F in my list of engines for a _Continuous_ Tourney ... the complete work I do here, my complicated _continuous_ tourney is for the trash can. Much more interesting as to used such programs (at the Minimum we can say ... Status unclear) are to use the other available engines. And in my opinion the other available engines are much more interesting.

Furthermore:
For me most important are my stats to playing styles. I am not a programmer and originality I can checked with my method only in looking stats and comparing analyzes. If I can build the opinion that a program have today nothing to do with all this, I added the engine. Maybe I am wrong with different engines I added, but I am not a god. All other users are not a god and can build an own opinion, Sedat do, CEGT do, CCRL, Graham do, Ingo do with here IPON. It's complicated in my view. I wish me that the situation will be solved in the future. Thats is better for Computer chess as the situation we have. Because each time ... also in ten years it will be a main topic. It's a bad black hole in Computer chess and the most important persons here should try to clean it.

Best
Frank

How can you steal something that is freely given?

Very good point Graham !

But I can't say the same issue about Ippolit

Rybka's author did not give the permission...

And I kindly suggest again to the experts,
Please take your attention: who cracked Rybka and released as free ?
This is a BIG crime...

Best,
Sedat

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Very good point Graham !

But I can't say the same issue about Ippolit

Rybka's author did not give the permission...

And I kindly suggest again to the experts,
Please take your attention: who cracked Rybka and released as free ?
This is a BIG crime...

Best,
Sedat

The big crime is selling 1 hour cluster time for 2000 bugs.

What else is this than greed?

Especially, when latest SF on single core performs better than 256-core Rybka on a cluster for free.

Also, Vas commercialised Rybka precisely several weeks or just 1 month after he published the first free release.
Is not that greed and well thought approach in advance?

For comparison, Robert Houdart, when his engine Houdini achieved the first spot, had to wait for 1.5 years before commercialising it. Do you notice the difference?

Also, Houdart never thought of doing a trick like cluster Houdini.

But is it really possible that you, Sedat, and Frank, are so blind?

Please do not get me wrong, I respect you, as well as Frank, as valuable contributors to the computer chess community, your rating list and Frank's are great, I have viewed them and sometimes downloaded games for browsing, so they have been of help. Also, Frank writes, as you rightly point out, very nice interviews, but if you ask me, you should concentrate more on your rating lists and interviews, rather than continuously posting neverending threads about an issue that actually does not exist.

[Guenther]

Very good point Graham !

But I can't say the same issue about Ippolit

Rybka's author did not give the permission...

And I kindly suggest again to the experts,
Please take your attention: who cracked Rybka and released as free ?
This is a BIG crime...

Best,
Sedat

The big crime is selling 1 hour cluster time for 2000 bugs.

That would be really a huge crime.

But if he sold it for 2000 bucks it's just capitalism, which is not
a crime in itself at least in most parts of the world.

[Sedat Canbaz]

Very good point Graham !

But I can't say the same issue about Ippolit

Rybka's author did not give the permission...

And I kindly suggest again to the experts,
Please take your attention: who cracked Rybka and released as free ?
This is a BIG crime...

Best,
Sedat

The big crime is selling 1 hour cluster time for 2000 bugs.

What else is this than greed?

Especially, when latest SF on single core performs better than 256-core Rybka on a cluster for free.

Also, Vas commercialised Rybka precisely several weeks or just 1 month after he published the first free release.
Is not that greed and well thought approach in advance?

For comparison, Robert Houdart, when his engine Houdini achieved the first spot, had to wait for 1.5 years before commercialising it. Do you notice the difference?

Also, Houdart never thought of doing a trick like cluster Houdini.

But is it really possible that you, Sedat, and Frank, are so blind?

Please do not get me wrong, I respect you, as well as Frank, as valuable contributors to the computer chess community, your rating list and Frank's are great, I have viewed them and sometimes downloaded games for browsing, so they have been of help. Also, Frank writes, as you rightly point out, very nice interviews, but if you ask me, you should concentrate more on your rating lists and interviews, rather than continuously posting neverending threads about an issue that actually does not exist.

Hello Lyudmil,

Thanks for your kind words and interest...

About Rybka Cluster issue,
I am not from Rybka team...that's why I have no much idea about these issues...
What I can say, yes...it looks like the rental price is expensive,
But however we have no any info regarding how much money Lucas is invested in this BIG machine...
Maybe the target is that:
Rybka cluster to be rented with less renters, and that's why the price is high...

Personally I would prefer,
Rybka cluster price to be 200-300 USD per hour and then I expect to earn more money, because then I would expect to see more renters...

But however,
This is not my issue and I have no any right...,
Plus Lucas is free and he can say any price which he likes....and nobody is forced to rent it for 2000 USD...


Best,
Sedat

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Sorry for the late answer yesterday I was too busy

First of all,
Why are so nervous and aggressive ? why do you use foul language ?
Take it easy my friend...don't worry, be happy...)!

Chess is our hobby !
And I still think that our hobby should be a 'bridge' for a good friendship !

And if you don't like Vas or Ed, or Me or this thread,
Simply I suggest you to ignore this thread...usually intelligent people prefer this way...

Btw, I think you are from Bulgaria, right? and I was born in Bulgaria too
That's why I think we should be even more close chess friends together...

About Rybka issue,
As far as I know you was out of CompterChess during Rybka days, so I don't care much your opinions

Take a pencil and write in paper,
Without Rybka and Fruit:
- Stockfish, Komodo, Houdini... would not be so strong as nowadays !

So that's why,
Don't be ungrateful...and don't forget to say 'thanks' to both genius programmers !
Of course if you have a BIG heart !)


And last,
I am in the side of Justice...I am in the side of Lovers...
In other words: I am not in the side of Haters !)


Best Wishes,
Sedat

So, on this forum, everyone is either from Bulgaria, or is a Bulgarian expatriate...

Maybe you should write something down instead: Vas is not a genius, quite the contrary, simply, he, just as Mr. Houdart, happened to be a sufficiently strong chess player, while at the same time knowledgeable in programming.

Until Vas times, programmers did not pay enough attention to evaluation and chess knowledge, as there simply did not exist good programmers that were at the same time good chess players. So the chess knowledge he added made Rybka strong.

After that, Vas invited Larry to make Rybka eval even better.
And after Rybka, Komodo followed the same approach, Houdhini as said had a programmer knowledgeable at chess, and SF also uses some chess knowledge ideas from here and there.

So this was the new trend that Vas started: introducing refined eval into engines. But, as you know, he did not write the full code.

Apart from that, why should I praise Vas?

He came into computer chess for money, he commercialised Rybka 1 month after the first free release, and he sold 1 hour of cluster Rybka time for incredible amount of money, running into the thousands.

1 hour of 256-core Rybka playing the strength of 1-core Stockfish, is that justice? Or maybe just greed? So he was not in computer chess for the fun of it, or partly for the funf of it and partly for the money, but mainly and exclusively for the money.

Is that what I should respect him from?
Is this a big heart?

And I actually do not know why you constantly repeat big heart.

So I tell you again, I respect your effort for the community and your rating list, I visit and sometimes download games, but you better stick to that, posting useful threads with comparisons and statistics, rather than just neverending threads with no point.

Can you tell me, what is the point of this thread?
How does it help computer chess?

Why is it so important to know what is Vas doing currently?
I think he is in the bathroom; or maybe, ..... Iweta.

So now you know, is this a big contribution to computer chess?

So I repeat again, I respecy your efforts, as well as what Vas did in his time, but posting endless pointless threads does not help computer chess at all.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow!......Strong words my friend.........is not free speech ok?

Answer yourself.

[Sedat Canbaz]

Can you tell me, what is the point of this thread?
How does it help computer chess?

Yes....100% agreed

If you check my previous postings (on this thread)
You will noticed that many times I already stated that this thread is gone into different direction and we should consantrate on other things
But it looks like there are some people, where they are doing their best that RYBKA is a clone...here I can not keep my self...sorry...

And plus Vas is the only author who is banned (via signitures by many programmers)
This is a very bad ...the real gladiators should not prefer the easiest cheap way

That's why my Rybka love is increased x 1000 times more....


Best,
Sedat