Fabien's open letter to the community

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.
jwes
Posts: 773
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:11 am

Re: Fabien's open letter to the community

Post by jwes » Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:26 am

bob wrote:
hgm wrote:
wims wrote:There is no way of knowing wether or not the code has its origin in a decompile or if its a rewrite. Its possible to write code that looks exactly like a decompile.
Indeed. Like it is possible to write code that looks exactly like the original. But it would be a bit stupid to do either of that, as it would be a way to make sure the original copyrights still apply to it. The mechanism by which you actually produce the copy is irrelevant. What is relevant is how much it looks like the original.
If decompiling produces the exact same output as rewriting it then you need to explain why decompiling is cloning while rewriting is not. Both are clearly cloning in my opinion, both are at least derivatives
By 'output' you mean here 'moves it makes', as opposed to the binary output from the compiler? This has been a well-fought battle in the software industry. If I write an operating system that requires exactly the same input as Unix, and gives us the same output on it, would it be a violation of the AT&T copyrights on it? The answer is an unequivocal 'no'. Hence we have Linux...
JUST so long as there is _no_ AT&T sys V unix source included. This has happened a few times in the Linux past, and code was completely rewritten to solve the problem... It is not always clear whether code was written by AT&T or by users, after a long time elapses. But AT&T has a memory like an elephant. :)
It has been a long time since ATT transfered the copyrights on Unix. So far the courts have ruled that Novell owns the copyrights but SCO is appealing. SCO has some interesting legal theories about software copyright which could make almost any derivation from copyrighted source a copyright violation, but if they cannot prove they own the copyrights to Unix, it becomes moot. I might compare SCO to an animal, but it would not be an elephant.

Xann
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 6:14 pm
Location: Lille, France

Re: ......Any answer to this Mr Wael??

Post by Xann » Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:35 am

Xann wrote:Anyone remembers this or knows who "duncan" is?
Apparently Duncan was quoting Rick Fadden :
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... t&start=30

Anyone remembers this thread or knows who Rick Fadden is?

Fabien.

Ryan Benitez
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:21 am
Location: Portland Oregon

Re: Fabien's open letter to the community

Post by Ryan Benitez » Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:47 am

Xann wrote:
SuneF wrote:I took a brief at look at Fruit v2.1.2 and compared it to Strelka 2.0, there are many differences though.

* Strelka is all bitboard Fruit is not.
* Strelka has multiple specialized search routines for check and null windows, Fruit does not.
* Evaluation and move selection looks quite different.
Looks are not so important.

Several experts that possibly don't want to be mentioned plus myself concluded that Strelka contains a large amount of Fruit algorithms.
Ryan, however, did not see Fruit in Strelka.
Anthony concluded that it was perhaps a modified version of Fritz 5.
Anthony is most certainly an expert.

How are these differences possible?
It's because I, and I assume some others as well, look "through" the code all the way to what it computes (the mathematical function that the code implements).
And we compare what Strelka computes with what Fruit computes.
"What", not "how".
And we find a match.

Bob, does this makes sense to you?

Fabien.
I only cared about GPL violations. That is the only thing that the FSF can do anything about.

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: ......Any answer to this Mr Wael??

Post by Ovyron » Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:52 am

noctiferus wrote:About Vas' statement of Fabien's agreement:

May be my memory fails, but was not in Vas' interview by Alan (also known as Banned For Life)?
Unfortunately I'm now unable to find the interview in the forum. Maybe somebody saved it...
BFL never interviewed Vas, it was Nelson Hernandez. Here's a transcript of the interview:

http://rybkaforum.net/mwf/rybkaattach/2 ... ewW031.doc

User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 4869
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA
Contact:

Re: ......Any answer to this Mr Wael??

Post by AdminX » Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:50 am

Ovyron wrote:
noctiferus wrote:About Vas' statement of Fabien's agreement:

May be my memory fails, but was not in Vas' interview by Alan (also known as Banned For Life)?
Unfortunately I'm now unable to find the interview in the forum. Maybe somebody saved it...
BFL never interviewed Vas, it was Nelson Hernandez. Here's a transcript of the interview:

http://rybkaforum.net/mwf/rybkaattach/2 ... ewW031.doc
Yes, Here was my reply to M.
AdminX wrote:
M ANSARI wrote: I think too much is being made about Rybka 1.0 beta and since that was free, I don't see it as a big deal
Not all Versions of Rybka 1 were a free beta. Vas himself said that later versions of Rybka 1 were Commercial. You can here him say so in this Nelson Hernandez video. (About 14:30 minutes into the video)

http://chessok.com/download/A%20Convers ... ajlich.wmv

also posted here

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=14546
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers

Christopher Conkie
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Fabien's open letter to the community

Post by Christopher Conkie » Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:50 am

Xann wrote:
Christopher Conkie wrote:And so what will you do? (and I don't mean you specifically Chan), I mean you or anybody else? I for one will continue to use Fabian's Go programs if that's helpful?

Where will you "go"? (As Mr Berliner once told me)
Hi Christopher,

I remember your name, but not sure about the topic.
Was it Arena?

What Go programs?

You talked to Berliner?!!!

Fabien.
Hello Fabian,

Yes it was/is Arena back then along with Alexander Schmidt. The go old days of Toga and Patriot (come back please, all is forgiven) :)

The reference to Go is a play on words only because of what he said to me. He said that Go was more interesting than Chess as an exercise in AI programming. That Chess was a dead end. I'm starting to believe him. Next we will probably get Go clones.

Anyway.....to fill in the gaps.......

Here is the famous Strelka thread that I remember......

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... l?tid=1655

There is also this.......

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30245

And this......

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30219

It's a funny thing.....I used to remember more links but I'm cured now.

:)

Chris

User avatar
Sylwy
Posts: 3358
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:19 pm
Location: IASI (Romania) - the historical capital of MOLDOVA

Re: From Uranus with love !

Post by Sylwy » Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:16 am

Christopher Conkie wrote:
See that telescope he has? It might come in handy looking for another planet to relocate on.......
So what planet do you think for Robert?
Surely there is one that supports methane breathers somewhere?
I'm just trying to be helpful of course......dinnae want the wee man tae perish......know what ay mean?
Jawohl !

Here's Herr Robert ( together with his uber secret source code number 1.5a ) walking to Uranus (copyrighted image !) :

Image

Walking to Pluto regards ,

:roll: S :roll:

Milos
Posts: 2990
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:47 am

Re: ......Any answer to this Mr Wael??

Post by Milos » Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:38 am

Hi Fabian,
Nice to have you back, at least in order to clarify the issues.

I hope you'll have time to revise the following detailed compendium that was very professionally prepared by BB and contains his own findings and findings of Zach W.
IMHO it speaks volumes.

http://www.open-chess.org/download/file.php?id=219

Roger Brown
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:22 pm

Re: Solution

Post by Roger Brown » Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:15 pm

Xann wrote:
Roger Brown wrote:Thank goodness it is all just a hobby!

Suppose it was serious, like football (not soccer!!)?

Later.
Would commercial interest qualify as serious?

Fabien.




Hello Fabien,

Perhaps my position on the issue of Fruit, cloning, borrowing and commercial interest are unclear.

Let me clarify in some small part.

For the record it does not matter to me if there are commercial interests or not. Wrong is wrong in my book, free or not.

Later.
Last edited by Roger Brown on Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SuneF
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:19 am

Re: Fabien's open letter to the community

Post by SuneF » Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:18 pm

Xann wrote:
SuneF wrote:I took a brief at look at Fruit v2.1.2 and compared it to Strelka 2.0, there are many differences though.

* Strelka is all bitboard Fruit is not.
* Strelka has multiple specialized search routines for check and null windows, Fruit does not.
* Evaluation and move selection looks quite different.
Looks are not so important.

Several experts that possibly don't want to be mentioned plus myself concluded that Strelka contains a large amount of Fruit algorithms.
Ryan, however, did not see Fruit in Strelka.
Anthony concluded that it was perhaps a modified version of Fritz 5.
Anthony is most certainly an expert.

How are these differences possible?
It's because I, and I assume some others as well, look "through" the code all the way to what it computes (the mathematical function that the code implements).
And we compare what Strelka computes with what Fruit computes.
"What", not "how".
And we find a match.

Bob, does this makes sense to you?

Fabien.
I see you point but it's a difficult distinction to make.

A static exchange evaluator could be implemented in many ways but might result in the same functional behavior.

To us who don't see it perhaps you can point to some specific pieces of code that demonstrates the functional equivalence between Strelka and the original ideas in Fruit?

Post Reply