Dann Corbit wrote:What is the value of NPS? It's an irrelevant number, except for scale anyway.
Not really. If you are implementing smp, or trying to optimize your compile, it's more then important.
Finally, if a man fails to trim his hedge, should this be a reason to burgle his house?
Interesting wording, (un)fortunately untrue in both sentences. A proper question is, if a man grows creeper around his house on purpose, why should people be prevented to look into his yard, especially if he has a few somebody else's stuff inside?
Dann Corbit wrote:What is the value of NPS? It's an irrelevant number, except for scale anyway.
Not really. If you are implementing smp, or trying to optimize your compile, it's more then important.
For the programmer. Irrelevant for the end-user.
Finally, if a man fails to trim his hedge, should this be a reason to burgle his house?
Interesting wording, (un)fortunately untrue in both sentences. A proper question is, if a man grows creeper around his house on purpose, why should people be prevented to look into his yard, especially if he has a few somebody else's stuff inside?
My analogy was to point out that even if he did something wrong, that does not justify someone else doing something wrong.
IOW, If Joe shoots your mother, that does not give you the right to shoot Joe's mother.
P.S.
As far as I know, Vas has not shot anyone's mother yet.
Dann Corbit wrote:My analogy was to point out that even if he did something wrong, that does not justify someone else doing something wrong.
No argument with that. But I was talking about incentive, not morality. I would also argue it isn't wrong to decompile. I might have issues with making the decompiled source public or claiming it as original work. But again, I wasn't talking about the actual events, rather the interest in decompiling.
Dann Corbit wrote:What is the value of NPS? It's an irrelevant number, except for scale anyway.
Not really. If you are implementing smp, or trying to optimize your compile, it's more then important.
For the programmer. Irrelevant for the end-user.
Finally, if a man fails to trim his hedge, should this be a reason to burgle his house?
Interesting wording, (un)fortunately untrue in both sentences. A proper question is, if a man grows creeper around his house on purpose, why should people be prevented to look into his yard, especially if he has a few somebody else's stuff inside?
My analogy was to point out that even if he did something wrong, that does not justify someone else doing something wrong.
IOW, If Joe shoots your mother, that does not give you the right to shoot Joe's mother.
P.S.
As far as I know, Vas has not shot anyone's mother yet.
This is all true but I would prefer if here in CCC some experts would show their class by admitting and then propagating that what this is all about with Vas alleged lying output etc. pp. is all about his attempts to prevent software stealing. Ok, it didnt quite succeed but it just doesnt make sense to attach him the label of a "liar", as if he wanted toa betray players and users. And for this same reason the topic isnt really something that a programmer could communicate, so to speak. He cant just tell you that if you do this and that that then it's ok and normal again. Then it were no protection.
Why on this forum people or at least some, are so interested in doing harm to a special programmer, by chance the best around? The titleholder? Isnt it all hypocricy?
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
When i observe Rybka playing and i see the few (nps) sometime i'm asking that the engine output is lying about this, sometime it is up to 20 less nps than "fast" engine.
When i see the uge size of the EXE i think that may be it is not a ly because the eval function is fullfill of chess strategy and it is long to run it.
Is a frog's butt watertight?
Does a bear crap in the woods?
etc.
Answer to those questions, plus yours is "yes". Been discussed hundreds of times here already.
Milos wrote:And why it is not showing real numbers, that you should ask Vas. Like why its exe is so large, or why it takes 64 more MB of memory and other peculiar things.
I think these issues provide more incentive to decompile than anything else.
What is the value of NPS? It's an irrelevant number, except for scale anyway.
While depth is more interesting, different programs consider depth differently. For instance, Junior does not count single reply moves to depth the way that other programs do.
Finally, if a man fails to trim his hedge, should this be a reason to burgle his house?
I think the issue is similar to a tachometer in a car. Should a manufacturer include a tach that reports bogus RPM? Won't affect speed or economy, correct? So the question is, why report something bogus? Many cars don't have a tach, which is better than having one that reports random numbers.
Dann Corbit wrote:My analogy was to point out that even if he did something wrong, that does not justify someone else doing something wrong.
No argument with that. But I was talking about incentive, not morality. I would also argue it isn't wrong to decompile. I might have issues with making the decompiled source public or claiming it as original work. But again, I wasn't talking about the actual events, rather the interest in decompiling.
Considering that I also decompiled Rybka myself, I would have to say that it would be hypocritical for me to say it was wrong to decompile it.
The problem I have is that after decompilation, something was done to harm Vas with the information that was gained.
Legally, for educational purposes, such things are not wrong. But to use the information for unfair advantage or for harm is wrong.
Of course, I am not a lawyer, and perhaps my looking into the internals of Rybka was also faulty behavior.
Milos wrote:And why it is not showing real numbers, that you should ask Vas. Like why its exe is so large, or why it takes 64 more MB of memory and other peculiar things.
I think these issues provide more incentive to decompile than anything else.
What is the value of NPS? It's an irrelevant number, except for scale anyway.
While depth is more interesting, different programs consider depth differently. For instance, Junior does not count single reply moves to depth the way that other programs do.
Finally, if a man fails to trim his hedge, should this be a reason to burgle his house?
I think the issue is similar to a tachometer in a car. Should a manufacturer include a tach that reports bogus RPM? Won't affect speed or economy, correct? So the question is, why report something bogus? Many cars don't have a tach, which is better than having one that reports random numbers.
It says what you say it is - just bogus. Speed is a natural science term but output numbers are bogus because chess moves are not numbers or speed or love.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
Yours wasnt wrong at all because you tried to offer reasonable information without reveiling details but what Donninger and Hyatt did is wrong, they wrote what was in the code (Donninger) or what they thought the code allegedly reveiled, namely violation of GPL (Hyatt). And the latter with the addition that he however had no interest at all to come to a legal case, that is all was for science research. And that on the background of the hate campaign here in CCC. After the motto of outlandish blackmail: but all this could stop if Vas would speak, but he doesnt, so that will go on. From a moderator here!
Not that I would worry about Vas. The truth will come out and he will speak after that and then? Completely unnecessarily someone will lose something. Because he did as if he were a lawyer, but in truth he isnt. An expert never can be the judge in his own cases. Shouldnt be. Bob thinks this is all the same. It isnt! Otherwise we would be in lynching times. For good reasons we are not.
Last edited by Rolf on Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
