Bob Hyatt says that....

[Uri Blass]

show us specific lines of code that are equal to those from fruit.

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/ct_chess/Fr ... rt_go.html

This is some kind of joke?!

The 'code' contains 200 lines, many of which are blank, ignoring those, there are:

33 lines same
81 lines different

that's a 28% correspondence. Very funny joke.

You have no source of Rybka, so the variable names are guesswork, btw.

Given that the code chucks are doing the same thing, I find 81 different lines to 33 same completely reasonable for programs written by two different people.

Please look again. "33 lines the same". One of us can't count. I stopped at 50. If two lines of C are on the same line they are equivalent.

At least don't try to distort what is being presented. That code is absoilutely _not_ independently written.

50? my goodness me, that's a lot out of 114. Not even half. And many of the equivalances rely on creative naming of variables and functions to, guess what, be the same!

Less than than half of your only disassembled code block so far? Very funny joke, Bob. Hahahaha

This is the famous identical corresponding code blocks is it? The famous 4000 lines of Christophe?

That code could perfectly well be independently written.

Are you going to try and get Vas's source code revealed at icga by this method? Hmmm?

chris-
there's no proof about 'creative' naming either...it just as plausible that it was accurately done.

Doesn't look like you understand the creative disassembly process. The naming of functions and variables (symbols), in the absence of the symbol table (thrown away at complie time and not part of the executable) is entirely the creative work of the engineer (creative artist) doing the disassembly.

The artist invents the symbol names. Unsurprisingly, since he is out to prove correspondence with a target program, he invents the symbol names to match the target.

Hence, perfectly possible he recreates some source which only resembles the target source (especially in case of a mere 28% match) in the fantasies of the reverse engineer artist.

Just because it is computer "science", don't imagine it is science.

So if you publish the story of Matrix and replace the character names Neo, Trinity and Morpheus by John, Sarah and Peter, then you believe will never be caught?

Because as soon as I put back the real name in place in order to demonstrate your plagiarism you will call me a creative reverse engineer artist and will say that I have made up the whole thing to make it look like an existing story?

Substituting what is believed to be the real original names is the correct thing to do. If no plagiarism has ever taken place, this subsitution will never work. In the above example, if I try with Luke Sywalker, Dark Vador and Yoda, it simply does not work.

Your refutation of the method is simply obstruction. Your only goal is to prevent any sensible discussion to happen.

The most disgusting is that you are using your expertise in programming to deceive the people who do not have this expertise.



// Christophe

In case that rybka was the same as fruit except names of variables I could agree with you but it is not the case.

difference is not only in names of variables(and even if you take only one page of the "book" then you find that part of it is not the same not only because of names).

I am also against the example of book because programs unlike books have in some parts one way that can be considered objectively as best
so it is logical that different programmers will have the same code for some parts.

Edit:
You can say that uci is not one part that the program has to be the same and you are right here but
I think that learning from code of other people can clearly lead to similiar code and the code did not convince me that copy and paste has been done.

Uri

[tiger]

show us specific lines of code that are equal to those from fruit.

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/ct_chess/Fr ... rt_go.html

This is some kind of joke?!

The 'code' contains 200 lines, many of which are blank, ignoring those, there are:

33 lines same
81 lines different

that's a 28% correspondence. Very funny joke.

You have no source of Rybka, so the variable names are guesswork, btw.

Given that the code chucks are doing the same thing, I find 81 different lines to 33 same completely reasonable for programs written by two different people.

Please look again. "33 lines the same". One of us can't count. I stopped at 50. If two lines of C are on the same line they are equivalent.

At least don't try to distort what is being presented. That code is absoilutely _not_ independently written.

50? my goodness me, that's a lot out of 114. Not even half. And many of the equivalances rely on creative naming of variables and functions to, guess what, be the same!

Less than than half of your only disassembled code block so far? Very funny joke, Bob. Hahahaha

This is the famous identical corresponding code blocks is it? The famous 4000 lines of Christophe?

That code could perfectly well be independently written.

Are you going to try and get Vas's source code revealed at icga by this method? Hmmm?

chris-
there's no proof about 'creative' naming either...it just as plausible that it was accurately done.

Doesn't look like you understand the creative disassembly process. The naming of functions and variables (symbols), in the absence of the symbol table (thrown away at complie time and not part of the executable) is entirely the creative work of the engineer (creative artist) doing the disassembly.

The artist invents the symbol names. Unsurprisingly, since he is out to prove correspondence with a target program, he invents the symbol names to match the target.

Hence, perfectly possible he recreates some source which only resembles the target source (especially in case of a mere 28% match) in the fantasies of the reverse engineer artist.

Just because it is computer "science", don't imagine it is science.

So if you publish the story of Matrix and replace the character names Neo, Trinity and Morpheus by John, Sarah and Peter, then you believe will never be caught?

Because as soon as I put back the real name in place in order to demonstrate your plagiarism you will call me a creative reverse engineer artist and will say that I have made up the whole thing to make it look like an existing story?

Substituting what is believed to be the real original names is the correct thing to do. If no plagiarism has ever taken place, this subsitution will never work. In the above example, if I try with Luke Sywalker, Dark Vador and Yoda, it simply does not work.

Your refutation of the method is simply obstruction. Your only goal is to prevent any sensible discussion to happen.

The most disgusting is that you are using your expertise in programming to deceive the people who do not have this expertise.



// Christophe

Still trolling?

Disgusting are your mean and damaging attacks without evidence on another programmer.

Your repeated personal attacks on me are a sign of desperation, imo.

Why not go away and quietly produce this evidence you keep telling us all you've got, come back when you've got it? Why spend so much time here trolling and insulting instead?

I have asked myself, and myself answered he has no sign of desperation. Maybe you know better than me?

I don't understand why you do not try to prove me wrong by discussing the (dis)similarities found in the evidence rather than saying it's a personal attack to say your only goal is obstruction.

If you are not going for obstruction, let's just go back to the listings.

You will have the last word here because I'm not going to add any noise to this thread. Waiting for you on the listings.



// Christophe

[Alexander Schmidt]

Still trolling?
Disgusting are your mean and damaging attacks without evidence on another programmer.
Your repeated personal attacks on me are a sign of desperation, imo.
Why not go away and quietly produce this evidence you keep telling us all you've got, come back when you've got it? Why spend so much time here trolling and insulting instead?

I do not see more trolling or personal attacks by Christophe than by you.

Evidences where posted. I know, not enough for you, but for sure enough to explain his opinion...

[chrisw]

show us specific lines of code that are equal to those from fruit.

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/ct_chess/Fr ... rt_go.html

This is some kind of joke?!

The 'code' contains 200 lines, many of which are blank, ignoring those, there are:

33 lines same
81 lines different

that's a 28% correspondence. Very funny joke.

You have no source of Rybka, so the variable names are guesswork, btw.

Given that the code chucks are doing the same thing, I find 81 different lines to 33 same completely reasonable for programs written by two different people.

Please look again. "33 lines the same". One of us can't count. I stopped at 50. If two lines of C are on the same line they are equivalent.

At least don't try to distort what is being presented. That code is absoilutely _not_ independently written.

50? my goodness me, that's a lot out of 114. Not even half. And many of the equivalances rely on creative naming of variables and functions to, guess what, be the same!

Less than than half of your only disassembled code block so far? Very funny joke, Bob. Hahahaha

This is the famous identical corresponding code blocks is it? The famous 4000 lines of Christophe?

That code could perfectly well be independently written.

Are you going to try and get Vas's source code revealed at icga by this method? Hmmm?

chris-
there's no proof about 'creative' naming either...it just as plausible that it was accurately done.

Doesn't look like you understand the creative disassembly process. The naming of functions and variables (symbols), in the absence of the symbol table (thrown away at complie time and not part of the executable) is entirely the creative work of the engineer (creative artist) doing the disassembly.

The artist invents the symbol names. Unsurprisingly, since he is out to prove correspondence with a target program, he invents the symbol names to match the target.

Hence, perfectly possible he recreates some source which only resembles the target source (especially in case of a mere 28% match) in the fantasies of the reverse engineer artist.

Just because it is computer "science", don't imagine it is science.

So if you publish the story of Matrix and replace the character names Neo, Trinity and Morpheus by John, Sarah and Peter, then you believe will never be caught?

Because as soon as I put back the real name in place in order to demonstrate your plagiarism you will call me a creative reverse engineer artist and will say that I have made up the whole thing to make it look like an existing story?

Substituting what is believed to be the real original names is the correct thing to do. If no plagiarism has ever taken place, this subsitution will never work. In the above example, if I try with Luke Sywalker, Dark Vador and Yoda, it simply does not work.

Your refutation of the method is simply obstruction. Your only goal is to prevent any sensible discussion to happen.

The most disgusting is that you are using your expertise in programming to deceive the people who do not have this expertise.



// Christophe

Still trolling?

Disgusting are your mean and damaging attacks without evidence on another programmer.

Your repeated personal attacks on me are a sign of desperation, imo.

Why not go away and quietly produce this evidence you keep telling us all you've got, come back when you've got it? Why spend so much time here trolling and insulting instead?

I have asked myself, and myself answered he has no sign of desperation. Maybe you know better than me?

I don't understand why you do not try to prove me wrong by discussing the (dis)similarities found in the evidence rather than saying it's a personal attack to say your only goal is obstruction.

If you are not going for obstruction, let's just go back to the listings.

You will have the last word here because I'm not going to add any noise to this thread. Waiting for you on the listings.

// Christophe

Can you read? I said I was out of this until such time as your side had prepared the evidential material and list of concerns that your side keeps claiming it is going to do.

Where is the promised further and better document?

Why are you continually here, not preparing it?

[Uri Blass]

show us specific lines of code that are equal to those from fruit.

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/ct_chess/Fr ... rt_go.html

This is some kind of joke?!

The 'code' contains 200 lines, many of which are blank, ignoring those, there are:

33 lines same
81 lines different

that's a 28% correspondence. Very funny joke.

You have no source of Rybka, so the variable names are guesswork, btw.

Given that the code chucks are doing the same thing, I find 81 different lines to 33 same completely reasonable for programs written by two different people.

Please look again. "33 lines the same". One of us can't count. I stopped at 50. If two lines of C are on the same line they are equivalent.

At least don't try to distort what is being presented. That code is absoilutely _not_ independently written.

50? my goodness me, that's a lot out of 114. Not even half. And many of the equivalances rely on creative naming of variables and functions to, guess what, be the same!

Less than than half of your only disassembled code block so far? Very funny joke, Bob. Hahahaha

This is the famous identical corresponding code blocks is it? The famous 4000 lines of Christophe?

That code could perfectly well be independently written.

Are you going to try and get Vas's source code revealed at icga by this method? Hmmm?

chris-
there's no proof about 'creative' naming either...it just as plausible that it was accurately done.

Doesn't look like you understand the creative disassembly process. The naming of functions and variables (symbols), in the absence of the symbol table (thrown away at complie time and not part of the executable) is entirely the creative work of the engineer (creative artist) doing the disassembly.

The artist invents the symbol names. Unsurprisingly, since he is out to prove correspondence with a target program, he invents the symbol names to match the target.

Hence, perfectly possible he recreates some source which only resembles the target source (especially in case of a mere 28% match) in the fantasies of the reverse engineer artist.

Just because it is computer "science", don't imagine it is science.

So if you publish the story of Matrix and replace the character names Neo, Trinity and Morpheus by John, Sarah and Peter, then you believe will never be caught?

Because as soon as I put back the real name in place in order to demonstrate your plagiarism you will call me a creative reverse engineer artist and will say that I have made up the whole thing to make it look like an existing story?

Substituting what is believed to be the real original names is the correct thing to do. If no plagiarism has ever taken place, this subsitution will never work. In the above example, if I try with Luke Sywalker, Dark Vador and Yoda, it simply does not work.

Your refutation of the method is simply obstruction. Your only goal is to prevent any sensible discussion to happen.

The most disgusting is that you are using your expertise in programming to deceive the people who do not have this expertise.



// Christophe

In case that rybka was the same as fruit except names of variables I could agree with you but it is not the case.

difference is not only in names of variables(and even if you take only one page of the "book" then you find that part of it is not the same not only because of names).

I am also against the example of book because programs unlike books have in some parts one way that can be considered objectively as best
so it is logical that different programmers will have the same code for some parts.

Edit:
You can say that uci is not one part that the program has to be the same and you are right here but
I think that learning from code of other people can clearly lead to similiar code and the code did not convince me that copy and paste has been done.

Uri

I thought about it more and I think that even if you write program without copy and paste people may claim that you copy and paste and maybe they are right because you copy and paste from your memory.

Suppose that I write something like

Code: Select all

printf("sum of divisors of %d is %d\n",i,div(i));

How do I know to use printf correctly?
I copy and paste from similiar examples in my memory so it is impossible to program without copy and paste from some source and even if the source is my memory not about chess programs I copy and paste for my chess program.

If you need to do similiar job you are going to use similiar or same code.
If you ask 2 programmers to write a program that prints the number 5 you are going to get the same code by many programmers without copy and paste.

They simply copy and paste from memory and if they are used to code with printf and not with some other way to print numbers in the screen then you can expect both of them to use printf.

Chess programming is not printing the number 5 but it can consist small tasks that are programmed in the same way espacially when speed is important and there are not many ways to be the fastest.

Uri

[kranium]

Can you read? I said I was out of this until such time as your side had prepared the evidential material and list of concerns that your side keeps claiming it is going to do.

Where is the promised further and better document?

Why are you continually here, not preparing it?

Chris-

it is you, and you alone, that is continually demanding more.

Vas has not answered any of the initial questions yet, but according to you, the onus is squarely on us to (instantly/quickly) produce more?

it not up to you to determine if anything else needs to be presented. it is not a court case, there is no judge, and you're not the judge.

you're asking why does Cristophe continue to post?
if you are 'out of it' then why are you responding? must you have the last word?
Christophe has the same rights as you to post here...(when and if he wants)

Why doesn't Vas speak for himself?

[tiger]

Copy/pasting from your memory can be illegal if your memory is protected by the GPL and you release the resulting source code under a non-GPL license. Your memory can sue you for this.



// Christophe

[tiger]

Copy/pasting from your memory can be illegal if your memory is protected by the GPL and you release the resulting source code under a non-GPL license. Your memory can sue you for this.



// Christophe

[Terry McCracken]

Copy/pasting from your memory can be illegal if your memory is protected by the GPL and you release the resulting source code under a non-GPL license. Your memory can sue you for this.



// Christophe

[tiger]

Copy/pasting from your memory can be illegal if your memory is protected by the GPL and you release the resulting source code under a non-GPL license. Your memory can sue you for this.



// Christophe

And then it turns really ugly because you try to remember where you had already seen this code elsewhere, because your only defense is to point to prior art, and your memory refuses to release the information.



// Christophe