<cue DeepMind posting horrendous financials>chrisw wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:08 pmthe poster child of boom bust AI investment development cycle. Each boom has been accompanied propaganda-wise on dreams of “well if they can beat humans in chess ...” and each bust on failure to actually deliver on the dreams. So, I would posit, computer chess is about bullshit also. Extracting copious investment sums from greedy capitalists, isn’t that what AZ is really about? Sure, Go now as well. And one of the reasons there are a few sleazy crooks hovering around the upper echelons of it.
I think you are right.second, at programmer level, it’s about ego and identity. You can tell by the huge importance given to the name of the thing. The objection to Alliestein (or any other equivalent example) is that the original has been renamed, an act of stripping identity away from the actual originators. If it were called LC0WithSomeChangedBits the whole thing would be different. But Alliestein and something in the notes about thanks to LC0 is not the same thing at all. Alliestein says “I own this, its part of me now, my ego/identity is in it”, and “speak to me differently now, I am somebody, I created a chess engine”.
Likewise the people/person recognised for hard work in LC0, see this seizure of status (equivalent status to them) as kind of cheat “hey you can’t do that, I am in that engine, you are erasing me by the renaming and publicity act”.
See? It’s all about the naming. People in open source projects object when the project is renamed as some kind of new entity, and some new person gets a cheap route to status, which is really belonging to the originators, on the originators back and hard work.
Same with DeusX. The renaming and attempts to hide origins. That case more obviously about ego/identity because of the accompanying displays of narcissism.
PS. "Leela Chess Zero" is a much nicer name than lc0 don't you agree.