Fat Fritz 2

[Gabor Szots]

Now I moved the whole lot back to this thread, only leaving out the postings that engaged in, or referred to the name calling.

Again, my sincerest apologies for this.[/color]

Thanks HG. I myself have lost two posts but didn't deem them important enough to complain about.

[MikeB]

If you received a gratuitous copy, of FF2, then CCRL waas basically bribed to show it as separate. Be careful how you answer, the truth always has a way of coming out.

If anyone of you received a copy of FF2 without paying for you, CCRL is lacking independence.

What a load of tosh.

Please respond to the question here with an answer that is believable , so far I haven't heard one Mr Tosh.

http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 30#p882781

[RubiChess]

It is my belief that if an individual had done what Chessbase had done, that individual would have been ostracized from the computer chess community and perhaps the rating would never have been listed period, or perhaps, best case as a SF engine.

So one has to ask, why does Chessbase get a pass on this when no single individual would ever get such a pass. And I think we know why.

Like this guy: http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... =7&t=10456
To be fair: I assume the net of A. Silver is a little more work than just some random eval changes of this TalvinJacobs.

[Ozymandias]

Latest from the blitz list.

Weird, why would you show two stockfish engines at the top. Isn't normal practice is to show just one version for each engine?

This picture makes it all worse. The uninformed user, who doesn't know that SF12 since long is history, will now believe all marketing
tricks and scam coming from CB. He will now think, 'whoaaa CB FF2 has improved over SF by 23 rating points and is the new number one' lol
(We know that SF dev is surely already over +23 with its own net(s) bove old SF12)

The easiest solution to this situation would be for SF13 to be released without delay. That would leave everyone in its place (color aside).

Just out of curiosity:

Is the rating improvement of Stockfish-dev compared to Stockfish 12 only caused by improvement of its NNUE net, or does it come from search enhancements? If the latter, wouldn't using the FF2 net with the Stockfish-dev not give Fat Fritz the same improvement?

The net has been the same since November 29.

[Guenther]

It is my belief that if an individual had done what Chessbase had done, that individual would have been ostracized from the computer chess community and perhaps the rating would never have been listed period, or perhaps, best case as a SF engine.

So one has to ask, why does Chessbase get a pass on this when no single individual would ever get such a pass. And I think we know why.

Like this guy: http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... =7&t=10456
To be fair: I assume the net of A. Silver is a little more work than just some random eval changes of this TalvinJacobs.

Or this one:
[even less done, except changing some strings and disabling logging, which would have immediately revealed it,
but OTH forgetting about the error message about the settings file, which had an unique extension ;-)]
http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... 5&p=115342

Code: Select all

 Post by Graham Banks » Sat Jun 13, 2020 11:57 am
Sorry, but information has come to light that means we're choosing not to test this engine.

Guess who 'enlightened' with hard facts? I wonder why he wasn't simply told he is an idiot and a liar?

[kasinp]

It appears that the network file has been separated from the binary in the latest CB update.
Not clear to me if this means that SF binary from Feb 12th is now the basis of FF2. The network file itself is (still) called FatFritz2_v1.bin.

Peter

[MikeB]

It appears that the network file has been separated from the binary in the latest CB update.
Not clear to me if this means that SF binary from Feb 12th is now the basis of FF2. The network file itself is (still) called FatFritz2_v1.bin.

Peter

Peter,
Please run this command in Command Prompt Window and report the results:

CertUtil -hashfile C:\PATH\FatFritz2_v1.bin md5

PATH should be the path where FF2 bin file is located.

Thank you.

Mike B

[kasinp]

It appears that the network file has been separated from the binary in the latest CB update.
Not clear to me if this means that SF binary from Feb 12th is now the basis of FF2. The network file itself is (still) called FatFritz2_v1.bin.

Peter

Peter,
Please run this command in Command Prompt Window and report the results:

CertUtil -hashfile C:\PATH\FatFritz2_v1.bin md5

PATH should be the path where FF2 bin file is located.

Thank you.

Mike B

a89ad6de8979846ce3086b28ba0d606b
CertUtil: -hashfile command completed successfully.

[maac]

It is not funny and they should be doing the right thing. Due to my background as an auditor ,I am a professional skeptic, when something just doesn't add up, you have to ask questions.



Shashin and SugaR have far more changes to Stockfish than FF2. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation why FF2 should be treated differently than Shashin and Sugar. It doesn't add up, so I'm asking the question. As , FYI, I go further back in computer chess than you do and when I see a wrong I am not going to be quiet. Whether if FF2 is legal, I'm not a lawyer. But you don't have to be a lawyer to know this whole setup stinks to high heavens. And now you have two rating lists, that are calling a nearly 100% clone a different engine for rating purposes - an engine that has profit motive - you have to ask questions, Why ? To me , they appear to be in bed in together and if you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. This is an outrage. I'm not really interested in people opinions who choose to stick their head in the sand because they are simply thankful. You are simply a taker - what have you contributed to the computer chess community. Meanwhile there are hundreds of developers who contributed to SF and now see Chessbase SF making a buck on the work they did. Chessbase is not some nickel and dime enterprise - they do NOT deserve to financially benefit off the work of others who contributed thousands and thousands of of hours of work pro bono. Quite honestly , if you cannot see something is inherently wrong. I'm not saying legally wrong , I am saying common sense wrong with what transpired the last week or so - I cannot help you. I will continue to voice my opinion and if you or others do not like it, I am fine with you blocking me - there is "foe" button, just make me your "foe" and you will never see another one of my posts. I am good with that. Don't bother responding , I have marked you a "foe"

Excellent and pristine post, the summary embrace all the immorality (illegality?) of this case.
Thanks very much

[towforce]

It is my belief that if an individual had done what Chessbase had done, that individual would have been ostracized from the computer chess community...

Which is the worst crime? Some suggestions:

1. charging money

I'm Graham. I've made a new net for open-source SF and I'm charging €99 for the package.


2. changing the name

I'm Graham. I've made a new net for SF and I'm selling it as "Graham 2".


3. reusing a brand name

I'm Graham. I've made a new net for SF and I'm selling it as "Big Rebel 2".


4. claiming it's the best without showing data

I'm Graham. I've made a new net for SF and the resulting package is the best chess program in the world, say I.


5. not sticking to the spirit of the open source license

I'm Graham. I've made a new net for open-source SF, I'm charging €99, and I'm not sharing this new net.