Programmer code of honor (update)

[Rebel]

http://www.top-5000.nl/programmer_code.htm

So far 18 programmers subscribed to the code. Thanks all those who support the initiative.

Still a lot of names are missing and I want to collect the objections in order to investigate if the code needs an update.

So please contact me by email, PM or put your objections here.

Thanks.

Ed

[rbarreira]

Maybe some people didn't hear about it and would sign it, but I would bet that many simply don't see a point in doing it.

[diep]

Now that you're retired you start signing petitions, just like a research recently concluded that civil servants over here lose too much time signing petitions and usually also get a ticket abroad or travel to another city to do so?

How many people did YOU ever give credit Ed?

Vincent

p.s. Did you recently turn Roman Catholic?
Wasn't it good habit there to sign and sell 'indulgence letters (dutch: aflaat) some centuries ago?

[diep]

Maybe some people didn't hear about it and would sign it, but I would bet that many simply don't see a point in doing it.

It's like Gary Kasparov, after collecting some big cash in New York to demonstrate in Russia, "to do what is right". Even if he's correct in all his accusations against Putin, is the guy who was greedier than any other communist, the right person to do so?

I remember for example some rumours from some GM's who claim someone made millions of dollars betting at Deep Blue... ...besides the statement of Frederic Friedel: "there was something" which i could only explain as: "there was a contract taking care Deep Blue would win". Kasparov's initial reaction, a few minutes after the game, everything still is peace. He compliments deep blue and looks happy. Some hours later, i assume by then he hears "no rematch", then he's pissed like hell.

Was that the right person to start a campaign against Putin?
Or did he just get a financial offer to do so he couldn't refuse?

[Rebel]

Maybe some people didn't hear about it and would sign it,

Likely. Got 3 more entries.

but I would bet that many simply don't see a point in doing it.

I can imagine that because basically you are asked to obey the laws of your country Nevertheless in a land of chaos it's good to set a milestone, draw a line in the sand and see what happens.

However, what's new is the willingness to move things to a higher level and like in the scientific world give credit where credit is due when you take an idea from someone else. I can imagine this is an obstacle for some, especially those who are in active competition. An example:

Some time ago I had a look at Stockfish and I saw a King Safety condition that made sense to me. I ported the idea into my own thing and likely it's an improvement and if so I will notice it in the README (as I don't think it's in the CPW) if there ever will be a next version.

Such things can be pretty informative for competitors and might be a reason not to subscribe to the code.

[Rebel]

Now that you're retired you start signing petitions, just like a research recently concluded that civil servants over here lose too much time signing petitions and usually also get a ticket abroad or travel to another city to do so?

How many people did YOU ever give credit Ed?

Vincent

p.s. Did you recently turn Roman Catholic?
Wasn't it good habit there to sign and sell 'indulgence letters (dutch: aflaat) some centuries ago?

Your monthly period again Vince?

[Dan Honeycutt]

Maybe some people didn't hear about it and would sign it,

Likely. Got 3 more entries.

I'd say you want to bump or start a new thread like this about every four months. That frequency should keep it alive without annoying people.

Best
Dan H.

[Don]

http://www.top-5000.nl/programmer_code.htm

So far 18 programmers subscribed to the code. Thanks all those who support the initiative.

Still a lot of names are missing and I want to collect the objections in order to investigate if the code needs an update.

So please contact me by email, PM or put your objections here.

Thanks.

Ed

Hi Ed,

I did not sign the petition but I would in principle if there were some minor changes. The basic problem for me is that you basically have to take the whole package. If I sign a document I either have to completely agree or be given a chance to negotiate the terms.

But primarily I find that the document is too ambiguous - it doesn't define terms or clear up any issues - almost all programmer agree on the points but may not agree on the interpretation.

Imagine signing a document that says, "I promise to try to be a good person." Now even though your document is nowhere near that ambiguous, it makes the point. You could get 21 programmer to sign this and they would all believe they are making the same specific agreement but in fact they each have a different idea about what copying code really means.

I'm not saying this to be critical, I think putting this out there is a great idea. I may even sign it at some point since I am free to interpret it any way I choose. But I also have some difficulty with point number 2.

2. Not to reverse engineer the work of other programmers without their express permission.

At the moment it's my understanding that reverse engineering a commercial program in order to improve your own is illegal in most countries. I don't really know if that is true but that is my understanding.

In principle I do not believe that it's right to suppress ideas this way - it's exactly the same as forbidding someone from reading a book. Even machine executable code is not encrypted and some people can read it as easily as reading a book - so in principle I object to point 2. It's no different than looking at open source code, it's just a little harder. In this regard I am very liberal when it comes to suppressing of information, decreeing knowledge acquisition as illegal and so on. It's almost a form of tyranny to me. I have not personally done any RE of code for Komodo but Larry does a lot of reverse engineering and that would have to be considered wrong by your document too, right? So Larry cannot sign it.

I cannot agree to this point - that it is forbidden to try to understand how a program works. It's difficult for an intelligent person to not accidently notice things about how a program works and to consider this forbidden is as wrong as it can be. RE by using a disassembler is just a special case of doing this.

When it comes to plagiarism, I am firm - and I believe that is really the point your are trying to address with your document and I agree with this.

Your document already has 2 check boxes so it is customizable. I would sign it if you make it a bit more comprehensive and customizable. Of course if it is too customizable it just becomes a separate statement for each author and not a unified petition. So I can understand if you do not wish to do this. But I am probably not going to sign anything that tries too hard to package up how I should feel without a change to express personal differences.

[Rebel]

Hi Don,

Thanks for your openness and your concern for the well being of computer chess. Concerning the points you addressed:

1. I think every programmer knows what RE is, disassembling the executable of a competitor and then hunting for its secrets.

2. Every programmer who subscribes still can manipulate either with RE, copying, cryptic descriptions in the README which ideas he/she borrowed from others not to hint competitors. He is only cheating himself.

As such the programmer code means nothing other then a signal how we (the undersigned chess programmers) want to experience our hobby.

3. Unfortunately it's a bit hard to make any text changes because that would mean a start from scratch. I feel that the list is too young for an updated version nevertheless any concrete suggestion is welcome. Furthermore I think the text should not be decided by me any longer (although I am happy to host it) but discussed, maintained and voted by majority by the programmers themselves.

4. So I am sorry I can't offer you what you would wish at the moment (changes are really up to the community itself) but the script supports a large text area available for uncensored comments to explain your views.

5. Larry: Anno 2012 and in your case I understand that if one wants to compete on the highest level one must allow themselves the same freedoms as others are using else it is an unfair competition. In this respect I can understand you want to keep your options open, even when RE is the issue. It's an awkward situation created by those without a moral code who started it and as a result putting pressure on those who actually have one.

As such Komodo team would give a great signal refraining from RE. I would love to have you on the list setting an example.

[Don]

Hi Don,

Thanks for your openness and your concern for the well being of computer chess. Concerning the points you addressed:

1. I think every programmer knows what RE is, disassembling the executable of a competitor and then hunting for its secrets.

That is a very narrow definition. Here is a much more accurate and reasonable from the wikipedia. I want you to realize that I'm not being picky or petty about a specific definition because it's critical to the entire argument in my opinion. If it's not addressed it will come up anyway sooner or later.

From the wikipedia:

Reverse engineering is the process of discovering the technological principles of a device, object, or system through analysis of its structure, function, and operation.[1] It often involves taking something (e.g., a mechanical device, electronic component, software program, or biological, chemical, or organic matter) apart and analyzing its workings in detail to be used in maintenance, or to try to make a new device or program that does the same thing without using or simply duplicating (without understanding) the original.

2. Every programmer who subscribes still can manipulate either with RE, copying, cryptic descriptions in the README which ideas he/she borrowed from others not to hint competitors. He is only cheating himself.

As such the programmer code means nothing other then a signal how we (the undersigned chess programmers) want to experience our hobby.

3. Unfortunately it's a bit hard to make any text changes because that would mean a start from scratch. I feel that the list is too young for an updated version nevertheless any concrete suggestion is welcome. Furthermore I think the text should not be decided by me any longer (although I am happy to host it) but discussed, maintained and voted by majority by the programmers themselves.

4. So I am sorry I can't offer you what you would wish at the moment (changes are really up to the community itself) but the script supports a large text area available for uncensored comments to explain your views.

5. Larry: Anno 2012 and in your case I understand that if one wants to compete on the highest level one must allow themselves the same freedoms as others are using else it is an unfair competition. In this respect I can understand you want to keep your options open, even when RE is the issue. It's an awkward situation created by those without a moral code who started it and as a result putting pressure on those who actually have one.

As such Komodo team would give a great signal refraining from RE. I would love to have you on the list setting an example.

Thanks for the response. In case I did not make it clear, I am not opposed to any form of Reverse Engineering including using a disassembled listing - unless that is actually illegal. I believe that we all have to respect the law in that case. I don't see how some forms of RE can be arbitrarily forbidden.

Thanks.

Don