ethical dilemma

[bob]

Bob, im confused here. I read your "A" and "B" explanation above. And i have read more than once where in the past you stated that "certain people" or "certain person" has come on CCC, benefited greatly from ideas he got there, and then went off on his own and impemented these ideas with some of his own. It sounds to me like you believe whoever this person is, he could not have accomplished what he has without the benefit of knowledge gained from others. And you have stated that he was not willing to come back and share any of his thoughts or programming ideas. Im not concerned at all with the truthfulness of these statements one way or the other. What i would like- instead of referring to him or them as "A" or "B" or "this guy" or 'that person"- is for you to put a name to the exact person or persons you are referring to right here on the forum for all to see. Now that would really be something- tho i know it wont happen.

<satire of the day>

I can give you at least one name. It's Bob himself. Look, without all the friendly people from the net Bob could never have built his Crafty on such a top level. Standing on his own, Bob wouldnt be such a top player anylonger. Bob was the one of the big machines, but in the software program times Bob has much too many classes to teach that he could successfully compete. Somehow Bob is angry because Vas doesnt share all his ideas for free so that Bob could put them into his own program. For the overall benefit of Shredder, Junior, Hiarcs and Fritz (apart from SMK with some helpful little progs, where did the other EVER share some ideas for programming details??), whose organisators are never in Bob's critical focus for reasons unknown. We call this a still seeking strong sympathy potential... With Bob in his team Vasik would already be World Champion.

<that was the satire of a real world today>

"angry" is far from the right word. "disappointed" comes much closer to the point... I can remember the days when we all came up with new ideas, and we all were very open in sharing them, because we _knew_ we would get ideas in return. Each year after the ACM tournament, _everybody_ went home with several new ideas to try, having gave others an idea or two themselves...

You greatly overestimate the help I have received on Crafty. Eugene was by far the biggest contributor with the egtb stuff and some inline assembly for windows. More recently we have formed a small team which has led to lots of changes. But there are 5 of us total, and it has been going on for a year.

So "disappointed" rather than "angry" is the right adjective. There is a huge difference in the meanings as well... I've tried to live by a sort of "fair play" doctrine all my life. Alas, not everyone does. And I've pretty well come to that realization. But it does disappoint me at times.

[bob]

I don't have a "beef" with Vas. Specifically. I have a generic beef with anyone that asks lots of questions, gets detailed answers, then clams up and goes away. Lots of questions until he finds something new and better, then nothing...

You don't have to "wade thru countless posts" to figure that out. Several have voiced that opinion over the years. It hasn't been a secret...

Ok, I'll bite. To the best of my knowledge nobody besides you does ever ride on that pony and you are no evidence sitting on a safe chair at university. But what somehow stinks me is this: nobody else got such evil press comments from your side, no Uniake, SMK, no Ban, no Morsch or Feist. Only Rajlich now. That simply is something I wont classify here because it would mean a case for moderation. Too many here told you that they are completely astonished about you with that inconsistent position. You have more than one beef against Vas.

Rolf, grow up and do your research. I have mentioned _many_ times this same issue with regards to _all_ commercial programmers. Where have you been, or is your memory totally shot?

You can find plenty of such references if you only look hard enough. Which simply makes your entire statement above invalid in the extreme...

I have no beef against Vas. I have a beef with all that do this. There are others far more egregious in this behavior. They know who they are. Literally hundreds of emails asking specific questions about DTS this or DTS that. And then they are commercial. DTS is non-trivial to implement. The devil is in the details.

So, do some research before jumping in, and you won't end up looking foolish. My "commercial complaint" has been written and rewritten many times since the early 1990's. Anyone can find them. r.g.c.c for starters, but also here since we opened the doors...

Either contribute facts or butt out. We don't need grossly inaccurate statements added to a discussion...

[bob]

I don't have a "beef" with Vas. Specifically. I have a generic beef with anyone that asks lots of questions, gets detailed answers, then clams up and goes away. Lots of questions until he finds something new and better, then nothing...

You don't have to "wade thru countless posts" to figure that out. Several have voiced that opinion over the years. It hasn't been a secret...

Ok, I'll bite. To the best of my knowledge nobody besides you does ever ride on that pony and you are no evidence sitting on a safe chair at university. But what somehow stinks me is this: nobody else got such evil press comments from your side, no Uniake, SMK, no Ban, no Morsch or Feist. Only Rajlich now. That simply is something I wont classify here because it would mean a case for moderation. Too many here told you that they are completely astonished about you with that inconsistent position. You have more than one beef against Vas.

His number one beef is that Vas did it in 6 months, and won't tell him how. The punk. How dare he do in 6 months what others take years to do, if ever??

More disappointment, it seems. So now you are an accurate mind-reader? And you are _certain_ that was my point?

same advice as I gave Rolf. Grow up. That is not the point at all...

He feels this obligates Vas to tell him how he did it. Instead of lauding him as a genius, which most normal people would, he feels this justifies stealing his work to "level the playing field". A euphemism for saying that if someone can't do as well, steal it. It's ok. You have Bob's blessing. He won't lose any sleep over it.

Albert

The last part is true in a general sense. If someone wants to look at a program, study it, disassemble it (all perfectly legal) to find out how it works, and then reveal that, it suits me just fine. I'm not into piracy at all, I don't condone stealing at all. But revellation is a different issue.

All the other stuff mentioned is just nonsense and bitterness, rolled into one. And highly inaccurate when directed toward me...

[bob]

I'm not a lawyer either, but I am pretty certain that if it were to be judged by US intellectual property laws, that unrestricted use of a program would be interpreted as meaning running the program, and that if Vas had wanted to share the internal organs of Rybka, he would simply have published the source code.

I think the only element that would be debated, and subject to proof, would be whether Strelka did indeed use parts of Rybka. However, if this doubt were not in debate, I don't think there would be any question on guilt as per law.

Albert

Vas has stated categorically that Strelka is a Rybka Clone. Go to the Hiarcs Forum and read it for yourself. It's in the General Forum Main Lobby posted by Harvey.

It explains it all.

Terry

What does that have to do with a court of law?

Albert

Well we'll find out if the guy tries to do the same with the latest version of Rybka, (he's threatened to do so), but if he has any brains he won't go that far as he'll be sued!

You can bet on that!

Terry

Has Vas patented his new ideas? If not, there will never be a law suit because there is no infringement. Reverse-engineering infringement suits depend on the pre-existing patent to form the basis for the infringement. There is clearly no copyright issue if actual original code is not copied. In fact, US patent/copyright laws are very clear in what can be copyrighted and what has to be patented...

Nothing will come of this unless a patent is filed. then the idea is public and there are then many ways to produce the same result with a different approach, which would be beneficial to many.

[bob]

With hindsight - after Vasik's statement - Strelka's source shouldn't be published. It is a great source, but contains reverse engeneered stuff from a commercial program. The bitboard infra-structure, the unique way to index and use pre-calculated tables by pawn-structure and material etc..

How would chessbase act, if somebody publishes decompiled fritz-sources?

The ethical dilemma now - the idea of science (and open source) to share and publish ideas - versus the violated vital interests of a commercial programmer, whose initial ideas got uncovered and illegally published.

The source, already widespreaded, will engourage other programmers to use ideas from it, even if the original source got banned by a restraining order. We will likely get more clones. Some may adapt their own bitboard infrastructure with the search and evaluation routines of Strelka, or simply replace identifiers or simplify some expressions. The less they understand the semantics and principles, the more likely they may simply copy and paste on syntactical level.

Is it for instance ethically correct now, to discuss or explain the ideas - to encourage people to implement those ideas on their own way?

If that is true, I wonder how much of other already-released programs are incorporated into Rybka? Sounds a lot like the old pot/kettle thing to me... I'd bet you could find parts of other programs scattered in Rybka. He was not the one to "invent" the bitboard stuff at all, and I'd bet there are exactly zero "new bitboard tricks" in Rybka.

This is a tired, old, pointless discussion IMHO...

A day will come when Rybka is "yesterday's news" and this will all end by a natural death...

Oh yes, why don't you post this in the Rybka Forum?

Why would I care enough to waste the time???

Why are you wasting time with this issue, if you don't care???

It was being held in a forum where I participate. Why would I want to go to a forum that discusses a commercial program??? Particularly when I know that the author is not going to supply any technical details at all...

Nor would SMK or any commercial programmer, here or anywhere else outside which is already known or won't compromise their business.

What really is your beef with Vasik?

Has he done something truly unethical?

I'd really would like to know and in a concise format.

I don't want to piece it together by wading through countless posts.

Terry

I don't have a "beef" with Vas. Specifically. I have a generic beef with anyone that asks lots of questions, gets detailed answers, then clams up and goes away. Lots of questions until he finds something new and better, then nothing...

You don't have to "wade thru countless posts" to figure that out. Several have voiced that opinion over the years. It hasn't been a secret...

Then you have a generic beef with most if not all commercial programmers.

They all did the same damn thing! They came, they discussed and they left.

Terry

You are a day late and a dollar short. have you never seem me write that very statement in the past? _MANY_ times?

a search will pull a bunch of them up...

[Rolf]

I don't believe there is any existing algorithm used in computer chess that could not be re-invented from scratch. That should actually be intuitively obvious. But would you not agree that by "standing on the shoulders of others" you get a great boost with little effort?

I only wish most could have been around in the days of greenblatt (mack hack), kozdrowicki (coko), slate (chess 4.x/nuchess), Thompson (multiple versions of belle with and without hardware), Truscott/Wright (duchess), Schwartz (chaos), dan/kathe spracklen (multiple programs), Newborn (ostrich), Marsland (awit), Wendroff (lachex), Donskly (Kaissa), Scherzer (Bebe), Beal (program + papers), Kittinger (wchess among others), and a great number of others too numerous to mention. They all worked in a spirit of mutual benefit. And computer chess greatly benefitted. Some still work in that spirit today, no need to name them as most know who they are. But some do not. If someone works in a closet to develop an engine, more power to them. Even if they use published information, fine. But to ask dozens of questions, send hundreds of emails, and then disappear? A bit much, IMHO. If someone were to email me and say "I am thinking of doing a commercial chess program, will you answer these questions to get me started?" My answer would be "no"...

A concrete question then.

a) Did Vasik do this to you?

b) How could you be invited to do this? Mentioning your ideas or help? How far you could be publicly called a help to a commercial program?

c) Please what should people do who want to be creative and still want to have a living, Bob? Who dont have a job as a professor?

And above all? What do you want right now? Being a public institution in a field isnt enough for you? Could Vasik become a sort of assistent for you with a university job? That would be great. Not knowing if he would want to do that. But speak it out in honest - you've always given your word. Why do you speak with so many insinuations between the lines. In the case of Vas I know for sure, and others have confirmed this, that he's among the business programmer the one with the most intensive feedback back and thro. As I said, he's comparable to you. Any other, Ban, SMK, take who you want, are like autists in comparison.

[Terry McCracken]

I'm not a lawyer either, but I am pretty certain that if it were to be judged by US intellectual property laws, that unrestricted use of a program would be interpreted as meaning running the program, and that if Vas had wanted to share the internal organs of Rybka, he would simply have published the source code.

I think the only element that would be debated, and subject to proof, would be whether Strelka did indeed use parts of Rybka. However, if this doubt were not in debate, I don't think there would be any question on guilt as per law.

Albert

Vas has stated categorically that Strelka is a Rybka Clone. Go to the Hiarcs Forum and read it for yourself. It's in the General Forum Main Lobby posted by Harvey.

It explains it all.

Terry

What does that have to do with a court of law?

Albert

Well we'll find out if the guy tries to do the same with the latest version of Rybka, (he's threatened to do so), but if he has any brains he won't go that far as he'll be sued!

You can bet on that!

Terry

Has Vas patented his new ideas? If not, there will never be a law suit because there is no infringement. Reverse-engineering infringement suits depend on the pre-existing patent to form the basis for the infringement. There is clearly no copyright issue if actual original code is not copied. In fact, US patent/copyright laws are very clear in what can be copyrighted and what has to be patented...

Nothing will come of this unless a patent is filed. then the idea is public and there are then many ways to produce the same result with a different approach, which would be beneficial to many.

I can't be certain, I hope he has for his own sake. If he hasn't he's pretty much screwed

Terry

[fern]

Absolutely on target. One thing is the legal, another the moral -or as you choose to name it- issue.
If Vas took from everywhere and then he went secret, maybe we can say he is somewhat tight, greedy, non generous, the opposite of Bob Hyatt, he is whatever you may call it, BUT in any case he is NOT compelled to tell what he has done with the input he got before.
This is, BTW, another aspect of the matter: one thing is to get some input; another what do you do with it.
If the reasoning I have seen here was correct, then no inventor could claim his invention as his, less of all to patent it, as much certainly he took ideas from the full human history in technology and sciences.
I wonder who is the chess programmer than begun from scratch?
It does not exist.

[Terry McCracken]

With hindsight - after Vasik's statement - Strelka's source shouldn't be published. It is a great source, but contains reverse engeneered stuff from a commercial program. The bitboard infra-structure, the unique way to index and use pre-calculated tables by pawn-structure and material etc..

How would chessbase act, if somebody publishes decompiled fritz-sources?

The ethical dilemma now - the idea of science (and open source) to share and publish ideas - versus the violated vital interests of a commercial programmer, whose initial ideas got uncovered and illegally published.

The source, already widespreaded, will engourage other programmers to use ideas from it, even if the original source got banned by a restraining order. We will likely get more clones. Some may adapt their own bitboard infrastructure with the search and evaluation routines of Strelka, or simply replace identifiers or simplify some expressions. The less they understand the semantics and principles, the more likely they may simply copy and paste on syntactical level.

Is it for instance ethically correct now, to discuss or explain the ideas - to encourage people to implement those ideas on their own way?

If that is true, I wonder how much of other already-released programs are incorporated into Rybka? Sounds a lot like the old pot/kettle thing to me... I'd bet you could find parts of other programs scattered in Rybka. He was not the one to "invent" the bitboard stuff at all, and I'd bet there are exactly zero "new bitboard tricks" in Rybka.

This is a tired, old, pointless discussion IMHO...

A day will come when Rybka is "yesterday's news" and this will all end by a natural death...

Oh yes, why don't you post this in the Rybka Forum?

Why would I care enough to waste the time???

Why are you wasting time with this issue, if you don't care???

It was being held in a forum where I participate. Why would I want to go to a forum that discusses a commercial program??? Particularly when I know that the author is not going to supply any technical details at all...

Nor would SMK or any commercial programmer, here or anywhere else outside which is already known or won't compromise their business.

What really is your beef with Vasik?

Has he done something truly unethical?

I'd really would like to know and in a concise format.

I don't want to piece it together by wading through countless posts.

Terry

I don't have a "beef" with Vas. Specifically. I have a generic beef with anyone that asks lots of questions, gets detailed answers, then clams up and goes away. Lots of questions until he finds something new and better, then nothing...

You don't have to "wade thru countless posts" to figure that out. Several have voiced that opinion over the years. It hasn't been a secret...

Then you have a generic beef with most if not all commercial programmers.

They all did the same damn thing! They came, they discussed and they left.

Terry

You are a day late and a dollar short. have you never seem me write that very statement in the past? _MANY_ times?

a search will pull a bunch of them up...

Yes I seem to recall you have. Well to some degree looking at all sides equally I have to agree with you at least in part.

You're right, there's no fair play anymore, and unfortunate truth.

I think when you go commercial there are somethings you can't share but to be fair you should stick around and help as you did and share insights with others without having to give away something important that would jeopardise your business.

Terry

[Rolf]

I don't have a "beef" with Vas. Specifically. I have a generic beef with anyone that asks lots of questions, gets detailed answers, then clams up and goes away. Lots of questions until he finds something new and better, then nothing...

You don't have to "wade thru countless posts" to figure that out. Several have voiced that opinion over the years. It hasn't been a secret...

Ok, I'll bite. To the best of my knowledge nobody besides you does ever ride on that pony and you are no evidence sitting on a safe chair at university. But what somehow stinks me is this: nobody else got such evil press comments from your side, no Uniake, SMK, no Ban, no Morsch or Feist. Only Rajlich now. That simply is something I wont classify here because it would mean a case for moderation. Too many here told you that they are completely astonished about you with that inconsistent position. You have more than one beef against Vas.

Rolf, grow up and do your research. I have mentioned _many_ times this same issue with regards to _all_ commercial programmers. Where have you been, or is your memory totally shot?

You can find plenty of such references if you only look hard enough. Which simply makes your entire statement above invalid in the extreme...

I have no beef against Vas. I have a beef with all that do this. There are others far more egregious in this behavior. They know who they are. Literally hundreds of emails asking specific questions about DTS this or DTS that. And then they are commercial. DTS is non-trivial to implement. The devil is in the details.

So, do some research before jumping in, and you won't end up looking foolish. My "commercial complaint" has been written and rewritten many times since the early 1990's. Anyone can find them. r.g.c.c for starters, but also here since we opened the doors...

Either contribute facts or butt out. We don't need grossly inaccurate statements added to a discussion...

I couldnt be happier than right now when you're finally back into the ring. So that I dont need anymore to be looking foolish. But please stay now. I need you as my compass needle! All the best to you for the year 2008.