The Computer Chess Community

[mar]

As for Richard Vida he ran away when Houdart threatened to sue him for cloning Houdini.

Strong stuff you smoke.

[BrendanJNorman]

But to label somebody a thief, and to expect newcomers to acknowledge them as a thief, one must present irrefutable evidence from a mutually recognized authority.

Not really. When I walk out of a record store, and and I see someone sneaking out after me, who asks me whether I want to buy a compact disk (this happened 30 years ago, OK?) that I just showed some interest in while browsing the shop, from him for about half the market price... I don't do business with that guy, because I know he has just shop-lifted that CD. I don't think "well, he has not yet been convicted for this by a real judge, and it is not up to me to judge him, and he offers something I want very cheaply, so let me buy it".

Laws are made so that common people can know what society considers acceptable behavior, and what is considered criminal. And in the large majority of cases it leaves very little doubt about it. Aiding and abetting criminals in most societies is a crime in itself, even if you are just aiding them in crimes they have not yet been convicted for!

If you don't want to take somebody's word for it, you can check for yourself. The warning in the Synapse thread against this engine went accompanied by a link to a discussion that substantiated the accusation: it mentioned that a certain version of Synapse would report identical output (scores, moves and node count) as another engine. Which would be irrefutable proof of that it must be a plain copy, as there is no way you could get identical node counts on every position by coincidence. If you still don't believe that on hear-say, you can run the engines yourself, and check if they are the same.

If someone on the street would offer you a bicycle for sale at a suspiciously low price, bolt cutters visibly sticking out of his backpack, and a bypasser would say to you: "watch out for this man, I just saw him cut the locks off that bike in the parking lot there"... Would you feel free to ignore that, just because the bypasser is not a judge, and you don't know him from Adam? "Who cares? It seems like a fine bicycle" somehow doesn't seem an acceptable response. If the guy warning you had been an undercover policeman, and saw you conclude the sale after his warning, there is a good chance he would slam hancuffs on both of you, for stealing and fencing.

You're using too many false analogies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_ ... se_analogy), Mr Muller.

The entire story about the CD shop as far as I can tell, has little relevance to the topic of debate, although in itself it is quite fascinating.

I think your statement that "Laws are made so that common people can know what society considers acceptable behavior" is also false for what it's worth.

Laws are not made so that "common people" know what "society" considers acceptable behavior.

"Society" doesn't make the laws at all.

Laws are put in place as a way of governing the relationship between rulers/governments/leaders and their citizens and, "society" is what is created as a result of this governance.

With laws firmly in place, the education system of this empire/nation makes sure to plant in the minds of children that which the rulers/governments/leaders will accept as normal behavior and these guidelines in time, become the "morality" the society accepts.

Society actually has little say at all in this, but that's another topic altogether.

Back to Synapze.

I don't want to go digging for information about scores, moves and node count, I don't have time to do all of this useless stuff.

If I feel interested in this stuff, maybe I will, but If I am more interested to simply download the engine and have a look, this is my choice.

This is the only thing I have argued here.

Again, the bicycle analogy is a bit off IMO.

Downloading an engine which tons of people are talking about is slightly different to stealing somebodies bike and having the boltcutters sticking out of your backpack.

And some guys on an internet forum (already known to be full of accusations, abuse and bitterness) saying bad things about the engine, is also slightly different to a guy saying "watch out for this man, I just saw him cut the locks off that bike in the parking lot there".

Put it this way, if the guy warning me about the bike was a 100kg stranger wearing dark sunglasses and covered in tattoos, I might question the reliability of his info.

Some of the guys here at talkchess are the metaphorical equivalent of this guy.

[hgm]

Where did I state that 'society' made the laws?

If you consider the analogies false, you are still missing the point. Which iour stance that

to label somebody a thief, and to expect newcomers to acknowledge them as a thief, one must present irrefutable evidence from a mutually recognized authority.

is just wrong. No judge is required to label somebody a thief. The law in fact requires you (and everyone else) to do that yourself. The only thing a judge can, and you cannot, is punish the thief for his crimes. But if you fail to recognize someone as a thief, where you reasonably could have known he was, the law will consider you guilty of criminal behavior as well. And when the crowd around you all yell "thief!" you hardly can plead ignorance. When on trial for fencing, the defence that none of the people that pointed out the legal status of the merchandize had the authority of a judge will not save you from a conviction for fencing.

Downloading pirated software is a crime. I don't think the law considers it "slightly different" from stealing a bicycle. On the DVD I have just been playing there actually is a warning that says that copying it can carry a $25,000 fine, which is a lot more than I would get for stealing a bike here. That 'tons of people' talk about it doesn't grant you any rights at all. Many more people talk about the latest hit single from the Rolling Stones or the latest episode of Game of Thrones, and downloading those from a piracy website is just as illegal.

It is wise to question reliability of info, but if the info is alarming, it is foolish to ignore it without investigation. The defence that you are "just a chess player that uses these programs" when caught using pirated copies of them will be just as effective as stating that you only listen to music and don't play the guitar yourself if you are caught with bootlegged Rolling-Stones records.

[tmokonen]

As for Richard Vida he ran away when Houdart threatened to sue him for cloning Houdini.

Strong stuff you smoke.

Houdart did threaten legal action against Vida over Robodini, and Vida disappeared from this forum, and apparently computer chess as a whole, immediately afterward. Do you not remember?

[mar]

Houdart did threaten legal action against Vida over Robodini. Do you not remember?

he ran away when

Bold enough for you?
Richard didn't "run away", there was another reason to quit computer chess.

[BrendanJNorman]

Downloading pirated software is a crime. I don't think the law considers it "slightly different" from stealing a bicycle. On the DVD I have just been playing there actually is a warning that says that copying it can carry a $25,000 fine, which is a lot more than I would get for stealing a bike here. That 'tons of people' talk about it doesn't grant you any rights at all. Many more people talk about the latest hit single from the Rolling Stones or the latest episode of Game of Thrones, and downloading those from a piracy website is just as illegal.

No. I think it's YOU missing the point.

A DVD or a bike or any tangible, physical product can very easily be identified and proven to be a fake/copy.

Again, as I have pointed out a few times, I live in China - the home of fake iPhones, software and DVDs.

I am rather familiar with this shady topic and see it on a daily basis.

If you honestly wish to assert that computer CODE is as easy to identify as a fake/plagiarized version, as a DVD or a stolen bike, you're really making a stretch.

Even were I to completely disappear from this forum (which I will very soon), there will still be raging (as there has been for 10 years) the debate of which is stolen, which is cloned, which is merely a derivative etc.

This is hardly as black and white as a stolen bike.

[tmokonen]

Funny timing that he left immediately after the legal threat, isn't it?

[BrendanJNorman]

Funny timing that he left immediately after the legal threat, isn't it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlati ... _causation

[hgm]

I don't think that is a stretch at all. It is extremely easy to see whether two Chess engines are the same. Just run them on a few positions, and see if they print identical output. Anyone can do that. Its really not more difficult than looking at the serial number on the frame of a bicycle or a car.

[BrendanJNorman]

I don't think that is a stretch at all. It is extremely easy to see whether two Chess engines are the same. Just run them on a few positions, and see if they print identical output. Anyone can do that. Its really not more difficult than looking at the serial number on the frame of a bicycle or a car.

So which legit engine has IDENTICAL output to Synapze?

Finally, this is what I've been waiting for...

Tell me the versions and I'll test for myself.