Kayra 1.1

[mehmet123]

I was thinking that most of the private chess engines that violate GPL will be open source code after some time. But now I don't think these chess engines have any plans to be an open source engine. I think the number of these engines will decrease if no tester tests these chess engines that violates GPL rules and Playchess and other platforms does not allow people to use these chess engines.

[tcusr]

Why would I care if there's no positive results from it? Changing working code just for the sake of it is not something I would consider a feature. As a user I don't care.

If you agree, Tomasz, I have a suggestion to you.

I took a break from the Kayra project for now, but I'm thinking of starting again soon. When Kayra 1.2 is ready, I will send this chess engine to you. Test it with these conditions. 1 min + 0.5 sec or 1 min + 1 sec time control , 2000 / 3000 games, short opening book.
If this chess engine doesn't outperform the latest Stockfish Dev in your test by at least +5 elo, i will never release the new version of Kayra.
For this, my only request from you is to give me 2 attempts.

I like this duel, all chess engines enthusiasts would benefit from this two SF TOP derivatives after the match, while all other original open source authors <= 200 ELO could only eat the dust

Mexican Standoff Stockfish vs Fat Titz vs Kayra

Image from Wikipedia , All credits to Wikimedia Commons
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... euse_guide

yeah you're an idiot

Never reacting using the sense of humor , uh? Obviously It was a joke.

i don't see where the joke is but i was referring to the fact that you have no idea of what you are doing, as Ras said.
mehmet changes affected the HCE evaluation which is rarely used because of the NNUE, kranium proved how useless these changes are by disabling the NNUE

[op12no2]

I was thinking that most of the private chess engines that violate GPL will be open source code after some time. But now I don't think these chess engines have any plans to be an open source engine. I think the number of these engines will decrease if no tester tests these chess engines that violates GPL rules and Playchess and other platforms does not allow people to use these chess engines.

Surely anything that violates a licence should be called out and discouraged?

[mehmet123]

I was thinking that most of the private chess engines that violate GPL will be open source code after some time. But now I don't think these chess engines have any plans to be an open source engine. I think the number of these engines will decrease if no tester tests these chess engines that violates GPL rules and Playchess and other platforms does not allow people to use these chess engines.

Surely anything that violates a licence should be called out and discouraged?

This rule change should start on the Talkchess Forum. Moderators should take an urgent decision and then ban testing of these GLP-violating engines.
I'm skeptical about PlayChess. Chessbase company have made a significant amount of money by just adding a new NNUE net to Stockfish.

[tcusr]

I was thinking that most of the private chess engines that violate GPL will be open source code after some time. But now I don't think these chess engines have any plans to be an open source engine. I think the number of these engines will decrease if no tester tests these chess engines that violates GPL rules and Playchess and other platforms does not allow people to use these chess engines.

Surely anything that violates a licence should be called out and discouraged?

This rule change should start on the Talkchess Forum. Moderators should take an urgent decision and then ban testing of these GLP-violating engines

you can't be real

[mehmet123]

you can't be real

Why?

[tcusr]

you can't be real

Why?

you gave your modified version of stockfish (without source, so non conforming to GPL) to some of these testers and now you're saying moderators should ban this behavior?

[AlexChess]

I was thinking that most of the private chess engines that violate GPL will be open source code after some time. But now I don't think these chess engines have any plans to be an open source engine. I think the number of these engines will decrease if no tester tests these chess engines that violates GPL rules and Playchess and other platforms does not allow people to use these chess engines.

Surely anything that violates a licence should be called out and discouraged?

This rule change should start on the Talkchess Forum. Moderators should take an urgent decision and then ban testing of these GLP-violating engines.
I'm skeptical about PlayChess. Chessbase company have made a significant amount of money by just adding a new NNUE net to Stockfish.

I try AGAIN to contact Amenophis asking to release his modified Raubfisch SF source code. If not, I remove it from my SuperBlitz. I have never been able in reaching Fisherov authors, but if I will remove Raubfisch, I will remove all not GPLv3 compliant engines. Omar Khalid has already switched to ShashChess and SugaR support and I can then remove Eman. But I keep all legal SF derivatives.

[mehmet123]

you can't be real

Why?

you gave your modified version of stockfish (without source, so non conforming to GPL) to some of these testers and now you're saying moderators should ban this behavior?

This is the first time I've heard of this rule. If that's true, I'll pay attention from this rule.

What I know is that if you send a private chess engine that does not contain source code to the testers, and the testers ask for the source code, but the engine developer does not provide the code, then GPL violation occurs. Eduard and a few other testers made no such requests from me.

[amanjpro]

That is a great result. I play with higher time controls (5 + 0 on 22 threads and ponder ON). So far unbeaten in almost 900 games in a row. The engine achieves great search depths in the server game. For me, Kayra calculates significantly deeper than some other engines with 64 cores. I know depth isn't everything, but Kayra plays strong. I just got games from a friend where Kayra was playing with 126 threads. The friend is impressed - he has won many games. I'll be showing some in PGN soon.

Dear Eduard, we must be resilients. We must understand that in Talkchess there are mainly original authors that hate SF derivatives. But I want to support Mehmet, you, Sylwy and all other friends here.

I have Kayra 1.1 PB + your superlative Kayra.bin book. I cannot share it. My new unexpected friend that kindly compiled it for me has asked so, but I have suggested to him to give the BM2 build to you too.

To demonstrate to boring haters here that I'm not a troll, a spammer or a liar, I add a screenshot of Proteus Chess that I have writed 20 years ago (!) in Visualbasic 6.0. I have finally compiled Stockfish-master with Msys2 instead of continuing to try to use Visual Studio 2019 (used for my asp.net works, but now I will start with chess) that on Windows 11 ARM64 under Parallels M1 is incredibly slow. I'm modifying it and I will publish under GPLv3 one more SF derivative: AlexChess



PS: Guenther, Amaji, Mattheis, Aleksei, tcusr and others, please stop insulting me. I'm not reading your comments anymore because you are all in my ignore list and I will mainly contact my friends privately (luckily they are the majority)

Why have you removed a part of the real name?


The engine is the wellknown LarsenVB which already had an interface for WB connection.
The GUI (in alpha stage and looks quite hacked together) and names three 'authors', either you are one them and did a little bit of work with the others, or you more likely you faked another person by omitting a part of the name.

It would make no sense to deface ones' own name? Alessandro Morales may not be Alex Mora, nor non-existing Alessandro Mora.
Should be not too difficult to check though...

I can only repeat you seem to be very sick and have a real DK syndrome et al.

Hahahaha he had to trim a bit of the author's name to match his. Alex dear you need to visit your doctor