Houdini 1.03 is available

[Sylwy]

You can continue to disassemble and will answer

Hi Alex !

Latter !

I'm in a long holiday !

Was just a friendly fire for Jury !


Regards,
Silvian

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Alex,

could you see on how many positions (which are important) Houdini was changed.

Thinking on the thread from Thinker programmer.

Best
Frank

[Roger Brown]

Hi Alex,

could you see on how many positions (which are important) Houdini was changed.

Thinking on the thread from Thinker programmer.

Best
Frank

Hello Frank Quisinsky,

Let me see if I understand you clearly:

You are advocating that someone disassemble a closed source engine to provide you with answers.

Soooooo...where does that stop exactly?

Does this need to know only apply to engines which you are certain are derivatives? Or can any commercial program now be ripped apart?

I find that request odd coming from you.

I would prefer open to closed source BUT one is free not to download and use the thing.

Requesting disassembly be done and the results published seems a dangerous road to tread on.

Later.

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Roger,

but it is an IPP fam. program only!
Isn't it?

Perhaps information I missed?
The "Programmer" or perhaps "playing style creator" ... I don't know ... don't give clear answeres to clear question!

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 29&t=34578

I think, if the programmer used sources from others he should give the details.

Example:

Robert Houdert wrote on his webpage:
"Without many ideas from the excellent open source chess engines Ippolit/Robbolito, Stockfish and Crafty (in that order), Houdini would not nearly be as strong as it is now."

Which ideas of Crafty and Stockfish?

If I read what the Thinker programmer wrote it's Ipp Fam. only. Why the programmer wrote that and why the programmer don't give clear answers in the latest months.

Sorry, but I don't like that!

Later ...

Frank

[Roger Brown]

Hi Roger,

but it is an IPP fam. program only!
Isn't it?

Perhaps information I missed?
The "Programmer" or perhaps "playing style creator" ... I don't know ... don't give clear answeres to clear question!

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 29&t=34578

I think, if the programmer used sources from others he should give the details.

Example:

Robert Houdert wrote on his webpage:
"Without many ideas from the excellent open source chess engines Ippolit/Robbolito, Stockfish and Crafty (in that order), Houdini would not nearly be as strong as it is now."

Which ideas of Crafty and Stockfish?

If I read what the Thinker programmer wrote it's Ipp Fam. only. Why the programmer wrote that and why the programmer don't give clear answers in the latest months.

Sorry, but I don't like that!

Later ...

Frank

Hello Frank,

I can understand and even appreciate your position.

What I am objecting to is the casual way you request that a closed source program be disassembled and the results of that disassembly published.

Are you saying that the antecedents of that engine justify this approach?

The author does not answer in a way that satisfies you so rip the engine open and see for yourself and publish those findings.

Wow.

I am saying that opening that door for this engine today may be opening the the door to far more murkier things in the future.

Bear in mind that one is free to use or not use the engine. I do not and it really has not made a difference in my life. I do like the fact that the author (I suppose you would query that term) responds quickly with fixes that actually seem to work based on the comments of the users.

That is a good quality.

This approach has an invasive feel to it which - in my opinion - is not justified by your dis-satisfaction with the author's openness or lack thereof.

Later.

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Roger,

seems, that you are today a bit agressive?

Where your read that?
Disassembled?
I wrote that?
You are sure?

Don't know what you mean!

Like to get an answere, compare what the Thinker programmer wrote. That's enough for myself. I have no interest to get reverse engineering results.

At the moment no proofs that 1% from Houdini's playing strength is own work. Sorry, I saw a person, which used open source material for an own closed source engine.

Stockfish = GPL
Crafty sources using too ...

The programmer wrote that on his own webpage!

So, I think it's right that I asked for more information. A programmer should give such information if sources from Stockfish and Crafty are used. Isn't it?

Later ...

Like your "later" as latest word since the first contact we had for around 12 years

Best
Frank

[Milos]

but it is an IPP fam. program only!
Isn't it?

And Rybka is a Fruit fam. program. So it's also ok to disassemble it and publish findings, isn't it .

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Milos,

perhaps it have to do with "mentality" ... beeing different from country to country I think. Nothing to do with high / low morale.

If a person(s) thieves ...
It this saying not ...
An other can do the same!

That's what I mean in other threads to the same topic.
Wrote that on different times ...

I think the most have problems to see different instances. Chess players should differentiating the topic we had since so many months.

Once again, I have nothing against the programmer of Houdini! But if Robert used GPL sources from others, he should to be able to answer of such a lightly question. Most questions to him, which are a bit complicated, he don't give any answers. It's OK, but in this case the programmer of Houdini have to life with critic from others.

Isn't it?


Honest:
The computer chess community to get used on all the nice comments "proud programmers" like it to give since so many years here. A good example is this forum. So the programmer of Houdini don't matching to this group after all what I read from him "so far". I hope he is a bit more open to clear questions ... it would be nice to all of his fans and to the others ... to the community.

Best
Frank

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Robert,

that's what I not understand.
You mean ipp fam. engines, is this right?
Your program called "Houdini" is the same, isn't it?

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 29&t=34578

1.
So, what is the difference to ipp fam. engines?

2.
Which sources of Crafty and Stockfish did you used?

Once again ...

Best
Frank

[Roger Brown]

Hi Roger,

seems, that you are today a bit agressive?

Where your read that?
Disassembled?
I wrote that?
You are sure?

Don't know what you mean!

Like to get an answere, compare what the Thinker programmer wrote. That's enough for myself. I have no interest to get reverse engineering results.

At the moment no proofs that 1% from Houdini's playing strength is own work. Sorry, I saw a person, which used open source material for an own closed source engine.

Stockfish = GPL
Crafty sources using too ...

The programmer wrote that on his own webpage!

So, I think it's right that I asked for more information. A programmer should give such information if sources from Stockfish and Crafty are used. Isn't it?

Later ...

Like your "later" as latest word since the first contact we had for around 12 years

Best
Frank

Hello Frank,

I am going to skip past the aggressive bit as I am sure that responding to it will get us nowhere useful.

Let me try it this way since you seem determined to steer this conversation down different paths.

Where did the author say that he used source code? I am taking this quote from his site directly:

Without many ideas from the excellent open source chess engines Ippolit/Robbolito, Stockfish and Crafty (in that order), Houdini would not nearly be as strong as it is now.

Ideas are not, as yet, restricted. The sharing of ideas is one of the main reasons for opening up code is it not? So I think you are being less than transparent when you say that he used code.

So why are you making this request of this author?

The only way that you can learn what code went into a closed source executable is by disassembly Frank. There is no other code to see. So you did not have to say it explicitly. Besides the poster you were encouraging to have a look explicitly mentioned disassembly Frank.

I think I would be reluctant to share if the person making the demand said that the strength of the program had nothing to do with my efforts.

Could he share more? Yes.

Does he have to? No.

Yes, it has been many a year that we have spoken.

Those were the days...

Later.