A few observations on NNUE/ SF/ FatFritz2 and an alternate scenario.

[frcha]

I have been looking at the recent FatFritz2 controversy and have drawn a conclusion that will be contrary to many on this forum.
As a developer - If I were to come up with an "innovation" that I think has great value - I would never use Open Source license esp. not GPL. NEVER.

Imagine hypothetically that I instead came up with NNUE instead of the gentlemen in Japan - or even if they did but had no intention of sharing implementation for free. If in private testing of their ideas, they realized they had stumbled upon a gold mine and wanted to not just get credit for their innovation but also profit from it. (As compared to having their name being one of many in an Authors file ) .
The obvious step would be to come up with their own engine that would use NNUE - maybe not too easy but certainly much more challenging and fulfilling then using existing open-source software and getting very little credit for their innovation!
If they had succeeded in doing this there would be a new # 1 engine and SF would be #3, since LC 0 would be #2. And they could profit from it just as well since it would sell very well as commercial engine.

Additionally, in this hypothetical scenario - fat fritz 2 will be developed except now Chessbase, will pay some licensing to the authors and Silva will profit just as now. Now StockFish will be #4 and soon forgotten just like the old days when everyone cared only about Rybka and then Houdini.

Regarding the current situation some have pointed to Chessbase/Silva being unethical but I strongly disagree. First, any advertising is almost always misleading, 2nd there is originality in the new Fat Fritz2 since it is a different network with different evaluation that chess players find incredibly useful, 3rd it IS an innovation, and the author rightly wants to get credit and be compensated.

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

As far as open source goes – if an individual’s effort is 80% or more of the project there is no way open source should even be considered as sensible – why throw away your work? And it is wasted – innovation should be rewarded.

[gaard]

I have been looking at the recent FatFritz2 controversy and have drawn a conclusion that will be contrary to many on this forum.
As a developer - If I were to come up with an "innovation" that I think has great value - I would never use Open Source license esp. not GPL. NEVER.

Imagine hypothetically that I instead came up with NNUE instead of the gentlemen in Japan - or even if they did but had no intention of sharing implementation for free. If in private testing of their ideas, they realized they had stumbled upon a gold mine and wanted to not just get credit for their innovation but also profit from it. (As compared to having their name being one of many in an Authors file ) .
The obvious step would be to come up with their own engine that would use NNUE - maybe not too easy but certainly much more challenging and fulfilling then using existing open-source software and getting very little credit for their innovation!
If they had succeeded in doing this there would be a new # 1 engine and SF would be #3, since LC 0 would be #2. And they could profit from it just as well since it would sell very well as commercial engine.

Additionally, in this hypothetical scenario - fat fritz 2 will be developed except now Chessbase, will pay some licensing to the authors and Silva will profit just as now. Now StockFish will be #4 and soon forgotten just like the old days when everyone cared only about Rybka and then Houdini.

Regarding the current situation some have pointed to Chessbase/Silva being unethical but I strongly disagree. First, any advertising is almost always misleading, 2nd there is originality in the new Fat Fritz2 since it is a different network with different evaluation that chess players find incredibly useful, 3rd it IS an innovation, and the author rightly wants to get credit and be compensated.

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

As far as open source goes – if an individual’s effort is 80% or more of the project there is no way open source should even be considered as sensible – why throw away your work? And it is wasted – innovation should be rewarded.

Bold is my own. If I gave you two engine outputs with first move choice and evaluation by SF and FF2, I can almost guarantee you could not tell them apart. In similarity tests, the two engines are virtually indistinguishable. Hence, chess players are more often to find FF2 incredibly redundant, not useful.

[Alayan]

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

Test Chessbase's net with Chessbase's search code.

...

Woops! It would be crap.

Pretending the Stockfish code and optimization to run NNUE as good as possible didn't matter for Fat Fritz is wrong.

Pretending the search doesn't matter is much worse.

And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

It would be something like #2 or #3 not far behind Leela, with Dragon close by. Search would have kept being improved for classical and more evaluation patches would have come, so it would likely have been 20-40 elo stronger than SF 310721. So bad!

[Raphexon]

I have been looking at the recent FatFritz2 controversy and have drawn a conclusion that will be contrary to many on this forum.
As a developer - If I were to come up with an "innovation" that I think has great value - I would never use Open Source license esp. not GPL. NEVER.

Imagine hypothetically that I instead came up with NNUE instead of the gentlemen in Japan - or even if they did but had no intention of sharing implementation for free. If in private testing of their ideas, they realized they had stumbled upon a gold mine and wanted to not just get credit for their innovation but also profit from it. (As compared to having their name being one of many in an Authors file ) .
The obvious step would be to come up with their own engine that would use NNUE - maybe not too easy but certainly much more challenging and fulfilling then using existing open-source software and getting very little credit for their innovation!
If they had succeeded in doing this there would be a new # 1 engine and SF would be #3, since LC 0 would be #2. And they could profit from it just as well since it would sell very well as commercial engine.

Additionally, in this hypothetical scenario - fat fritz 2 will be developed except now Chessbase, will pay some licensing to the authors and Silva will profit just as now. Now StockFish will be #4 and soon forgotten just like the old days when everyone cared only about Rybka and then Houdini.

Regarding the current situation some have pointed to Chessbase/Silva being unethical but I strongly disagree. First, any advertising is almost always misleading, 2nd there is originality in the new Fat Fritz2 since it is a different network with different evaluation that chess players find incredibly useful, 3rd it IS an innovation, and the author rightly wants to get credit and be compensated.

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

As far as open source goes – if an individual’s effort is 80% or more of the project there is no way open source should even be considered as sensible – why throw away your work? And it is wasted – innovation should be rewarded.

[chrisw]

I have been looking at the recent FatFritz2 controversy and have drawn a conclusion that will be contrary to many on this forum.
As a developer - If I were to come up with an "innovation" that I think has great value - I would never use Open Source license esp. not GPL. NEVER.

Imagine hypothetically that I instead came up with NNUE instead of the gentlemen in Japan - or even if they did but had no intention of sharing implementation for free. If in private testing of their ideas, they realized they had stumbled upon a gold mine and wanted to not just get credit for their innovation but also profit from it. (As compared to having their name being one of many in an Authors file ) .
The obvious step would be to come up with their own engine that would use NNUE - maybe not too easy but certainly much more challenging and fulfilling then using existing open-source software and getting very little credit for their innovation!
If they had succeeded in doing this there would be a new # 1 engine and SF would be #3, since LC 0 would be #2. And they could profit from it just as well since it would sell very well as commercial engine.

Additionally, in this hypothetical scenario - fat fritz 2 will be developed except now Chessbase, will pay some licensing to the authors and Silva will profit just as now. Now StockFish will be #4 and soon forgotten just like the old days when everyone cared only about Rybka and then Houdini.

Regarding the current situation some have pointed to Chessbase/Silva being unethical but I strongly disagree. First, any advertising is almost always misleading

Lame argument.

, 2nd there is originality in the new Fat Fritz2 since it is a different network with different evaluation

not a definition of original.

that chess players find incredibly useful,

Citation?

3rd it IS an innovation,

You mean it WAS an innovation when the people who did it, did it. But that was prior, no?

and the author

Author? Please consult dictionary.

rightly

Rightly? The non-author has non-rights to nothing.

wants to get credit and be compensated.

Compensated for what exactly?

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

As far as open source goes – if an individual’s effort is 80% or more of the project there is no way open source should even be considered as sensible – why throw away your work? And it is wasted – innovation should be rewarded.

Innovation was rewarded (for the innovators) with social credit, personal satisfaction, greater good, cooperative world view etc etc. Silver poisoned this social credit when he nicked all the work and, with ChessBase, set out to mislead for personal gain. Worse, he metaphorically spat on people who built a new community, saying whatever you do to make a socially cooperative world, there will always be someone who betrays you.

[frcha]

I have been looking at the recent FatFritz2 controversy and have drawn a conclusion that will be contrary to many on this forum.
As a developer - If I were to come up with an "innovation" that I think has great value - I would never use Open Source license esp. not GPL. NEVER.

Imagine hypothetically that I instead came up with NNUE instead of the gentlemen in Japan - or even if they did but had no intention of sharing implementation for free. If in private testing of their ideas, they realized they had stumbled upon a gold mine and wanted to not just get credit for their innovation but also profit from it. (As compared to having their name being one of many in an Authors file ) .
The obvious step would be to come up with their own engine that would use NNUE - maybe not too easy but certainly much more challenging and fulfilling then using existing open-source software and getting very little credit for their innovation!
If they had succeeded in doing this there would be a new # 1 engine and SF would be #3, since LC 0 would be #2. And they could profit from it just as well since it would sell very well as commercial engine.

Additionally, in this hypothetical scenario - fat fritz 2 will be developed except now Chessbase, will pay some licensing to the authors and Silva will profit just as now. Now StockFish will be #4 and soon forgotten just like the old days when everyone cared only about Rybka and then Houdini.

Regarding the current situation some have pointed to Chessbase/Silva being unethical but I strongly disagree. First, any advertising is almost always misleading

Lame argument. -

But true - Advertising is deliberately misleading.

, 2nd there is originality in the new Fat Fritz2 since it is a different network with different evaluation

not a definition of original.

It is an original network.

that chess players find incredibly useful,

Citation?

Why? check chessbase.com and youtube.

3rd it IS an innovation,

You mean it WAS an innovation when the people who did it, did it. But that was prior, no?

and the author

Author? Please consult dictionary.

Creator of network - if you wish.

Rightly? The non-author has non-rights to nothing.

wants to get credit and be compensated.

Compensated for what exactly?

He is already compensated for work - you cant be serious.

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

As far as open source goes – if an individual’s effort is 80% or more of the project there is no way open source should even be considered as sensible – why throw away your work? And it is wasted – innovation should be rewarded.

Innovation was rewarded (for the innovators) with social credit, personal satisfaction, greater good, cooperative world view etc etc. Silver poisoned this social credit when he nicked all the work and, with ChessBase, set out to mislead for personal gain. Worse, he metaphorically spat on people who built a new community, saying whatever you do to make a socially cooperative world, there will always be someone who betrays you.

I don't care for social credit nor a socially cooperative world - that a lot of nonsense not based on reality promoted by those who desire a totalitarian society. People work, they get paid real simple.

[frcha]

And finally the statement “Using a new Japanese AI technology” is correct while attributing NNUE to StockFish is NOT.
And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

Test Chessbase's net with Chessbase's search code.

...

Woops! It would be crap.

Pretending the Stockfish code and optimization to run NNUE as good as possible didn't matter for Fat Fritz is wrong.

Pretending the search doesn't matter is much worse.

I do not pretend search does not matter. You are pretending that the network does not matter. Also, my hypothetical the NNUE authors created their own search while SF does not have NNUE. - this new hypothetical engine would have eventually become #1 and totally original.

And yes, Stockfish is an AB engine with no neural network – test that and see what ranking it gets in the rating list .

It would be something like #2 or #3 not far behind Leela, with Dragon close by. Search would have kept being improved for classical and more evaluation patches would have come, so it would likely have been 20-40 elo stronger than SF 310721. So bad!

They hypothetical: The NNUE authors would have eventually come up with a strong enough engine to beat SF /Leela - remember SF was gifted the NNUE.

[gaard]

That you acknowledge advertising is deliberately misleading, but then refer to chessbase.com (where FF2 is sold and advertised) when asked for a citation for your claims that FF2 is useful to chess players, cannot be construed as anything but satire.

[Alayan]

Also, my hypothetical the NNUE authors created their own search while SF does not have NNUE. - this new hypothetical engine would have eventually become #1 and totally original.

The effort and skill needed to get a good enough search (and NNUE net) to beat Stockfish would have been dozens of time higher than for Fat Fritz. You vastly underestimate how difficult this is.

Of course, in that scenario the engine would be original and would bring analysis value. It would have been received very differently.

What's puzzling is why you think this hypothetical makes what actually happened in reality any better.

[frcha]

What's puzzling is why you think this hypothetical makes what actually happened in reality any better.

The hypothetical is to point out what is being conveniently forgotten - that the NNUE authors (this nothing to do with Fat Fritz) could have gone a different route and decided to get some compensation for their innovation - this would have required them to foresee how groundbreaking it was as well as definitely embark on a brand new engine project .

I began my post saying that I would have done things differently. Why should I contribute code to the #1 open source engine if I can use my innovation to dethrone it and make money in the process. Sure its a challenge but I have an edge.

It is incredibly hypocritical to disparage some one creating their own network which (bring it to court if you want) and selling it for money, when your engine is #1 ONLY because NNUE implementation was gifted as a POC.
As far as Fat Fritz 2 "controversy" - it is absolutely not one. If you think its in violation of GPL you can challenge in court. It is also perfectly moral - and the real reason for this anger is because someone cleverly figured out how to make money using open source software chess engine and a new plugin neural network.

The larger picture I am trying to paint is nothing to do with chess engines itself but the fact that there are too many people think that mediocrity and collaboration should trump meritocracy.