Robbolito 0.09 New Edition VS Rybka 3

[bob]

How do you account for the views of other respected programmers such as Gian-Carlo Pascutto, Don Dailey, Andres Valverdes (plus other programmers who now include Eric Mullins) when they say that they believe it to be a Rybka clone also?
And why would other forums including the Hiarcs forum ban links?
We can't live in cloud-cuckoo land in CCC forever. Links should be banned.
I challenge other programmers who believe Robbo to be a clone to step forward and say so.

Please remain on topic. We were talking about Larry's claim here.

I still answer your questions.

1. I don't think 'believing' is an evidence even if the 'believer' is a respected programmer.

2. The ban is not an evidence. It is a verdict.

Apparently if you declare someone guilty, then that is proof that they are guilty, at least in some court somewhere in never-never-land.

Furthermore, the charter states "questionable legal status", which means there are doubts, not that there is proof. The final decision, if no proof is pending, is a judgment call by the moderators.

Exactly. And if you will go back to my original comments when this issue was first a topic, I was on the side of Vas. And as a moderator we decided to not allow links here until the issue was resolved. We also did choose to allow the debate because that is what CCC is and should be about. But we are now approaching almost the one year mark on this topic, with zero information provided to support the original claim. One can't wait forever. If Vas chooses to provide some proof for this claim, I'd be quite happy to see Robo* banned permanently from all testing and events (and discussions). But so far, absolutely nothing substantive has been provided. The Robo* guys also deserve _some_ consideration until some sort of proof shows that they copied Rybka 3.

[bob]

How do you account for the views of other respected programmers such as Gian-Carlo Pascutto, Don Dailey, Andres Valverdes (plus other programmers who now include Eric Mullins) when they say that they believe it to be a Rybka clone also?
And why would other forums including the Hiarcs forum ban links?
We can't live in cloud-cuckoo land in CCC forever. Links should be banned.
I challenge other programmers who believe Robbo to be a clone to step forward and say so.

Please remain on topic. We were talking about Larry's claim here.

I still answer your questions.

1. I don't think 'believing' is an evidence even if the 'believer' is a respected programmer.

2. The ban is not an evidence. It is a verdict.

Apparently if you declare someone guilty, then that is proof that they are guilty, at least in some court somewhere in never-never-land.

Furthermore, the charter states "questionable legal status", which means there are doubts, not that there is proof. The final decision, if no proof is pending, is a judgment call by the moderators.

The decision by the moderators indicates that in their opinion the legal status of Robbo is not in question. In their opinion it is most likely not a clone or a reverse-engineered anything. If they thought otherwise, then the legal status would have to be in question.

You can either believe in "Guilty until proven innocent" or "Innocent until proven guilty." Personally, we went with the former for several months, but in light of no proof of any kind being offered, the latter is more appropriate.

This is only "questionable" because Vas has refused to offer any kind of evidence of copying. SInce he made the claim, he has some responsibility to support the claim with substantive data, not just an ambiguous statement.

I don't buy into the "guilty until proven innocent" approach here.

[kingliveson]

I can't imagine how adults can be so gullible and follow by blind devotion without pausing and thinking for a second. It is almost getting embarrassing when you read some of the comments. Bogus and ridiculous claims are made without backing them up. If you merely express reasonable doubt, you are labeled anti xxxxx. When someone hints that you have done wrong, and you come out and say you have not done wrong, who should describe what happened and provide proof?

Gullible my ass. I have looked at over 2000 games and unlike you I don't need to look at anybodies results as I know that people use different hardware and different books and setups which can be very confusing. I am lucky to have 3 Octas and 4 Quads where I can do my own testing and find out. Unlike you I do go through the games and I do try to figure out where one engine went wrong and what the reason was. I am especially interested when a certain engine's evaluation fails. You might think it is silly but that just shows how clueless you are of the facts. Have you looked at any Rybka 3 vs Robbo games? When you do, please report back and tell me if you think that Rybka 3 single core has a different evaluation than Robbo. Before you talk out of your ass, maybe YOU should investigate it some more. I have yet to see one single game where Robbo beat Rybka 3 due to a better evaluation. Rybka 3 loses either because it has a high contempt or it is simply outsearched ... never because Robbo evaluation is better or different. Now try looking at games between Stockfish or Shredder or Naum 4 ... they have different evaluations to R3 and even on a single core they will get some wins against an 8 core Rybka 3 because in some positions (not many) they have a superior evaluation. Robbo results against Rybka 3 8 core seem strange as the 8 core R3 has so far lost only 3 games out of 144. If results of other 4 core testing is looked at from posters, it would seem that the ELO difference between 8 core R3 and 1 core RL should be only 50 ELO not 170 ELO. I of course could be wrong about all this, but I most certainly have looked at tons of data and vigorously spend lots of time testing before coming to my conclusion. You are more than welcome to disagree, but to call something silly off the hip just shows ignorance.

Please analyze this position with both rybka and robbolito and explain the results: 8/3N4/8/8/1pp5/brpp3p/qpprp2P/1nkbK3 w - - 0 1

[Albert Silver]

How do you account for the views of other respected programmers such as Gian-Carlo Pascutto, Don Dailey, Andres Valverdes (plus other programmers who now include Eric Mullins) when they say that they believe it to be a Rybka clone also?
And why would other forums including the Hiarcs forum ban links?
We can't live in cloud-cuckoo land in CCC forever. Links should be banned.
I challenge other programmers who believe Robbo to be a clone to step forward and say so.

Please remain on topic. We were talking about Larry's claim here.

I still answer your questions.

1. I don't think 'believing' is an evidence even if the 'believer' is a respected programmer.

2. The ban is not an evidence. It is a verdict.

Apparently if you declare someone guilty, then that is proof that they are guilty, at least in some court somewhere in never-never-land.

Furthermore, the charter states "questionable legal status", which means there are doubts, not that there is proof. The final decision, if no proof is pending, is a judgment call by the moderators.

Exactly. And if you will go back to my original comments when this issue was first a topic, I was on the side of Vas. And as a moderator we decided to not allow links here until the issue was resolved. We also did choose to allow the debate because that is what CCC is and should be about. But we are now approaching almost the one year mark on this topic, with zero information provided to support the original claim. One can't wait forever. If Vas chooses to provide some proof for this claim, I'd be quite happy to see Robo* banned permanently from all testing and events (and discussions). But so far, absolutely nothing substantive has been provided. The Robo* guys also deserve _some_ consideration until some sort of proof shows that they copied Rybka 3.

The question of legal status is not limited to lifting code from Rybka, but ANY program. If you believe it has any reverse engineered code in it, that condemns it, even if you don't know of what.

[Rolf]

How do you account for the views of other respected programmers such as Gian-Carlo Pascutto, Don Dailey, Andres Valverdes (plus other programmers who now include Eric Mullins) when they say that they believe it to be a Rybka clone also?
And why would other forums including the Hiarcs forum ban links?
We can't live in cloud-cuckoo land in CCC forever. Links should be banned.
I challenge other programmers who believe Robbo to be a clone to step forward and say so.

Please remain on topic. We were talking about Larry's claim here.

I still answer your questions.

1. I don't think 'believing' is an evidence even if the 'believer' is a respected programmer.

2. The ban is not an evidence. It is a verdict.

Apparently if you declare someone guilty, then that is proof that they are guilty, at least in some court somewhere in never-never-land.

Furthermore, the charter states "questionable legal status", which means there are doubts, not that there is proof. The final decision, if no proof is pending, is a judgment call by the moderators.

The decision by the moderators indicates that in their opinion the legal status of Robbo is not in question. In their opinion it is most likely not a clone or a reverse-engineered anything. If they thought otherwise, then the legal status would have to be in question.

You can either believe in "Guilty until proven innocent" or "Innocent until proven guilty." Personally, we went with the former for several months, but in light of no proof of any kind being offered, the latter is more appropriate.

This is only "questionable" because Vas has refused to offer any kind of evidence of copying. SInce he made the claim, he has some responsibility to support the claim with substantive data, not just an ambiguous statement.

I don't buy into the "guilty until proven innocent" approach here.

You are very wrong here with the position already elaborated to death by Alexander Schmidt. Me and others have explained why a pseudo anon cant be granted the rights of the Constitution at all. No way. A nobody has no rights because he doesnt want to exist. But putting such a nothing against the word of a honest Wch is absolutely terrible. Evil. Please dont do this.

[pgeorges]

I dont buy that. Since that code has been stolen anything added to that would give away too much. Wait for a later version if it is properly safe. Or the online thing. The games must go on! Sorry but you have to suffer because criminals had been involved. In such a case you just cant dream of living on a moon. It's here, it's real life. Period.

Where has Vas ever said the R3 code was stolen?

It was during his stay in Budapest, Wroclaw or Dresden.

Can you point us to it? He has said several times that he does not have it because he moved on with rybka development and did not keep a copy of the R3 source.

They are both lying Harvey and the ugly thing is that they have forgotten their old lies and hence the confusion of Rolf....

All that I would say here is that nobody in their right mind would release a commercial product and not maintain the source that matches that product somewhere. How do you _ever_ find a reported bug if you don't have the code for that specific version to look at.

"What a wicked web we weave, when first we practice to deceive..." - Shakespeare

If one is honest at every turn, one never has to eat his own words... -Hyatt

I am an amateur coder. Simply for Scid's development I have local backups (both tar.gz and snapshots via rsync for redundancy) and web archives. Each released version is archived in 2 different places. Vas has been an IT professional for years. To lose a major release code is simply unimaginable. So the explanation is simple : Vas' agenda is overwhelmed, he found the worst excuse for not having the time to work on fixing bugs of Rybka 3. When you feel a bit burned out, I think this can be forgiven. And as a Rybka's customer, I forgive it.

Pascal Georges

[slobo]

Guess which engines can't find the mate in this position: 8/3N4/8/8/1pp5/brpp3p/qpprp2P/1nkbK3 w - - 0 1

Rybka solve it, but Robbo doesn't. How does it happen, after all, if Robbo is Rybka's clone?

[Graham Banks]

Guess which engines can't find the mate in this position: 8/3N4/8/8/1pp5/brpp3p/qpprp2P/1nkbK3 w - - 0 1

Rybka solve it, but Robbo doesn't. How does it happen, after all, if Robbo is Rybka's clone?

Do you understand the meaning of the word "honesty" or do you always like to ride with the outlaws?

[sockmonkey]

Guess which engines can't find the mate in this position: 8/3N4/8/8/1pp5/brpp3p/qpprp2P/1nkbK3 w - - 0 1

Rybka solve it, but Robbo doesn't. How does it happen, after all, if Robbo is Rybka's clone?

Do you understand the meaning of the word "honesty"?

You can find it shortly after "dignity" in the Macho Standard Dictionary, I think.

jb

[slobo]

Guess which engines can't find the mate in this position: 8/3N4/8/8/1pp5/brpp3p/qpprp2P/1nkbK3 w - - 0 1

Rybka solve it, but Robbo doesn't. How does it happen, after all, if Robbo is Rybka's clone?

Do you understand the meaning of the word "honesty" or do you always like to ride with the outlaws?

A guy who supports commercial interests in a hobby like chess, which has a motto GENS UNA SUMUS, gives us lessons about HONESTY.

Oh, my God.