Goodbye Talkchess

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Locked
Frank Quisinsky
Posts: 4819
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:16 pm
Location: Trier, Germany
Contact:

Re: BREAKING NEWS Bob was just check-mated by Al

Post by Frank Quisinsky » Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:39 am

Aber morgen schauen wir Fussball, gelle!
I like computer chess!

bob
Posts: 20346
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Talkchess

Post by bob » Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:13 am

Graham Banks wrote:
bob wrote:
Sean Evans wrote:
2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.
I thought that WCCC were very stringent about such matters. Has anybody complained to them?

Cheers,
Graham.
No idea, since I have not participated in one in a long while. I suppose someone _could_ if they saw fit, as it is a real issue.

lmader
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:20 am
Location: Sonora, Mexico

Re: BREAKING NEWS Bob was just check-mated by Al

Post by lmader » Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:20 am

Frank Quisinsky wrote:Aber morgen schauen wir Fussball, gelle!
Alles hat ein Ende, nur die Wurst hat zwei.
"The foundation of morality is to have done, once for all, with lying; to give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibilities of knowledge." - T. H. Huxley

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 30764
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Talkchess

Post by Graham Banks » Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:24 am

bob wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
bob wrote:
Sean Evans wrote:
2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.
I thought that WCCC were very stringent about such matters. Has anybody complained to them?

Cheers,
Graham.
No idea, since I have not participated in one in a long while. I suppose someone _could_ if they saw fit, as it is a real issue.
Then perhaps that would be the way to settle this long festering issue once and for all?
My email addresses:
gbanksnz at gmail.com
gbanksnz at yahoo.co.nz

Ralph Stoesser
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:28 am

Re: Talkchess

Post by Ralph Stoesser » Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:53 am

The clone detection test provide overwhelming evidence that OpenChess is a TalkChess clone. They use exactly the same board section names: General Topics, Programming and Technical Discussions, Tournaments and Matches. Coincidence? If you'd ask me, I'd say they are guilty. 8-)

User avatar
Rolf
Posts: 6081
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:14 pm
Location: Munster, Nuremberg, Princeton

Re: Talkchess

Post by Rolf » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:45 am

bob wrote: I only know what happened and have participated in discussions proving/discussing/disclosing the particulars. I have no standing to file a court case, and would not be interested in doing so since it is not my program, my problem, or my lack of ethics that led to this mess in the first place. Remember, _I_ did not copy anyone's source. I am just the messenger in this little fracus.
As a Christ you should know that pretending being sober and consistent, and nevertheless working with proven cloners, taking ideas from donating helpers for "open source crafty", on the bases of 80-90% of the code of forefathers in computerchess, is pure hypocrisy. As Albert showed you are well involved for a hate campaign but being asked you pretend indifference and lack of time and juristication, but why being in all the hate at all? Isnt it true if I concluded that you are only interested to grind an axe with Vas for reasons that remain in the clouds and could be assumed to be very personally motivated?

How come that you are so deeply obsessed by Vas and his business when you can well rely on money from university? As I said before, if you were consistent you would ask for the secrets of other business engines too, but you dont. Question is answered, why you are only focussed on Rybka and Vas. He knows something that you cant cope with despite hundreds of public hrelpers for open source Crafty. Again, as a Christ envy should never be the option. If you see something aggreeable in Norman, you should seek it in Vas too, if you have a minimally consistent ethical mind frame.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz

User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9635
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Talkchess

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:34 am

Rolf wrote:
bob wrote: I only know what happened and have participated in discussions proving/discussing/disclosing the particulars. I have no standing to file a court case, and would not be interested in doing so since it is not my program, my problem, or my lack of ethics that led to this mess in the first place. Remember, _I_ did not copy anyone's source. I am just the messenger in this little fracus.
As a Christ you should know that pretending being sober and consistent, and nevertheless working with proven cloners, taking ideas from donating helpers for "open source crafty", on the bases of 80-90% of the code of forefathers in computerchess, is pure hypocrisy. As Albert showed you are well involved for a hate campaign but being asked you pretend indifference and lack of time and juristication, but why being in all the hate at all? Isnt it true if I concluded that you are only interested to grind an axe with Vas for reasons that remain in the clouds and could be assumed to be very personally motivated?

How come that you are so deeply obsessed by Vas and his business when you can well rely on money from university? As I said before, if you were consistent you would ask for the secrets of other business engines too, but you dont. Question is answered, why you are only focussed on Rybka and Vas. He knows something that you cant cope with despite hundreds of public hrelpers for open source Crafty. Again, as a Christ envy should never be the option. If you see something aggreeable in Norman, you should seek it in Vas too, if you have a minimally consistent ethical mind frame.
Don't involve religion elements in the debate....against the charter and ethically not correct to say the least....this approach is of a questionable value and I'll report you if you do it again....
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….

Henrik Dinesen
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:52 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Henrik Dinesen » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:24 am

Steve B wrote:
sockmonkey wrote:
You are correct there, and I will honor my commitment and continue to moderate until the end of my term. I never intended to run for a second, so nothing has changed there. However, my focus, and my participation, will be on OpenChess
good to hear that Jeremey

i am a firm believer that honoring ones commitment is more important then anything else
the board was served well by you during a very contentious period
i still regret that Matthias ..a highly respected member of our community and significant contributor to Computer Chess felt the need to resign above the wishes of the members who elected him
years from now..when the current controversies of the day are long forgotten..all that you will be remember is that you stayed the course..full filled your obligation.. did not quit .and did not kneel to those very vocal few here who consider themselves some sort of self-appointed "protectors of the flame"

Graham has apologized now multiple times....in public..thats more then you can ask of anyone
takes a big man to do that ..no matter how you slice it...
you have returned his gesture by agreeing to say on for the remaining month until the next elections..

Well Done Regards
Steve
Well said Steve.
Henrik

bob
Posts: 20346
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Talkchess

Post by bob » Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Graham Banks wrote:
bob wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
bob wrote:
Sean Evans wrote:
2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.
I thought that WCCC were very stringent about such matters. Has anybody complained to them?

Cheers,
Graham.
No idea, since I have not participated in one in a long while. I suppose someone _could_ if they saw fit, as it is a real issue.
Then perhaps that would be the way to settle this long festering issue once and for all?
How so? Do you think Vas would release his source to them? ICGA is not going to go through the effort of reverse-engineering to prove/disprove this.

bob
Posts: 20346
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Talkchess

Post by bob » Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:40 pm

Rolf wrote:
bob wrote: I only know what happened and have participated in discussions proving/discussing/disclosing the particulars. I have no standing to file a court case, and would not be interested in doing so since it is not my program, my problem, or my lack of ethics that led to this mess in the first place. Remember, _I_ did not copy anyone's source. I am just the messenger in this little fracus.
As a Christ you should know that pretending being sober and consistent, and nevertheless working with proven cloners, taking ideas from donating helpers for "open source crafty", on the bases of 80-90% of the code of forefathers in computerchess, is pure hypocrisy. As Albert showed you are well involved for a hate campaign but being asked you pretend indifference and lack of time and juristication, but why being in all the hate at all? Isnt it true if I concluded that you are only interested to grind an axe with Vas for reasons that remain in the clouds and could be assumed to be very personally motivated?
Albert has not "showed" any thing of the kind. You might "imagine" this so-called "hate campaign", but what it really is is nothing more than "a search for the truth". As far as what you "assume" you should look up the usual "ass of U and Me" definition. There's zero personal motivation. If I were "motivated" as you want to claim, I would simply take the time to decompile Rybka myself. Since Vas is not going to clarify this mess, I find it difficult to take issue with the IP* family of programs with no hard evidence supporting the reverse-engineering / clone claims.


How come that you are so deeply obsessed by Vas and his business when you can well rely on money from university? As I said before, if you were consistent you would ask for the secrets of other business engines too, but you dont. Question is answered, why you are only focussed on Rybka and Vas. He knows something that you cant cope with despite hundreds of public hrelpers for open source Crafty. Again, as a Christ envy should never be the option. If you see something aggreeable in Norman, you should seek it in Vas too, if you have a minimally consistent ethical mind frame.
I'm not obsessed by Vas at all. That seems to be your problem, not mine. I'm only interested in either seeing proof that the IP* programs are clones or else seeing the persecution stop. I've said this many times previously, if envy were the issue, would I not have been on Hsu's case as well? I beat him fewer times (zero, in fact) than I have beaten Rybka. So perhaps your "envy" comment is a bit off base, eh? Certainly would not be the first time, would it?

Locked