Evidence Rybka Is/Isn't A Derivative Work

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Dirt
Posts: 2851
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:01 pm
Location: Irvine, CA, USA

Re: Evidence Rybka Is/Isn't A Derivwative Work

Post by Dirt »

Bill Rogers wrote:Greg he just won a new title in the last couple of weeks. It is in Chess News.
Bill
Did you think I was claiming he had lost his skills? On the contrary, I was pointing out that it is not really appropriate to refer to a GM as an international master.

It's been more than a couple of weeks.
User avatar
slobo
Posts: 2331
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:36 pm

Re: Evidence Rybka Is/Isn't A Derivative Work

Post by slobo »

Alexander Schmidt wrote:
Bill Rogers wrote:Oh, and so far there is not proof that it is not an original piece of work.Bill
And who decides what is a proof? :D

Some people have a different opinion, but please let us not start the discussions again, everything is told...
Hi Alex,

I like very much your newborn flexibility. Now you are free, and open for all possibilities. Good to see your progress.

Regards.
"Well, I´m just a soul whose intentions are good,
Oh Lord, please don´t let me be misunderstood."
User avatar
Sylwy
Posts: 4498
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:19 pm
Location: IASI - the historical capital of MOLDOVA
Full name: SilvianR

Re: Larry Kaufman role

Post by Sylwy »

Bill Rogers wrote:I can only add that Larry K. is an international master and has been involved with computer chess for a couple of decades now. Combine that with a really good programmer and it is not to hard to imagine they could make a superior chess program.
Oh, and so far there is not proof that it is not an original piece of work.
Bill

Hi !

Larry Kaufman isn't expert in programming.
His role in early Rybka was zero.
Even Rybka 1.o beta was the best in area.
His role in late Rybka 2 & Rybka 3 is exclusively connected to evaluation function.And not all evaluation - but only evaluation for imbalanced positions.Here he is an expert:

http://home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Art ... alance.htm

I don't know if Larry has a role in Rybka 4.
That's all !

Regards,
Silvian
gerold
Posts: 10121
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:57 am
Location: van buren,missouri

Re: Evidence Rybka Is/Isn't A Derivative Work

Post by gerold »

Sean Evans wrote:Hi,

What evidence is there that Rybka is or isn't a derivative work?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work

Cordially,

Sean
As for as i know just about all computer chess programs are
derivative work. Most coming from Crafty. :) .
No proof has been provided that Rybka is a clone. There is
a big diff between a clone and derivative.

Best to you,

Gerold.
Alexander Schmidt
Posts: 1217
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 2:49 pm

Re: Evidence Rybka Is/Isn't A Derivative Work

Post by Alexander Schmidt »

Well, I know I am right, and I don't care about other opinions anymore :)

Not really flexible :P