morality and legality of dowloading robbolito

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi,

to late, other thread.

But of course, you have right ... sorry!

Best
Frank

[Uri Blass]

<snipped>

Point 4:
Why so big *.exe files.
Users thinking ... so many chess knowledge ... so solowly (NPS) but very strong ?

I am thinking all the time:
The fast seacher forever will have an advantage to engines with knowledge. Here I have in my brain also an interview with Stefan Meyer-Kahlen to this topic in German radio for around 3 years.

Point 5:

I see no reason to assume that fast searcher will have an advantage to engines with knowledge.

There is an assumption that slow searchers have more knowledge than fast searchers.

I think that it is not clear and it is possible that the programmers of slow searchers simply do not know to write efficient code
and it is also possible that they give their program some counter productive knowledge not because of speed but because the knowledge is not correct.

I think that in order to compare evaluation knowledge of chess programs we need some competition when engines use the same search algorithm and search the same number of nodes per move when the only difference is the evaluation function.

This is something that people do not do so I really do not know if the evaluation function of slow searchers is superior or inferior to the evaluation function of fast searchers.

Uri

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi Uri,

OK, seems that I am in this point in learning position.
Thanks for your comments, interesting for me.

Best
Frank

[Rolf]

Frankly, do you expect that chessplayers are themselves so deeply rotten in their moral that they now would gamble in their games after having used dubious sources? I dont expect that. IMO decent chessplayers will use qualified engines with a strength that has been tested over many years.

And a last point. I'm not a programmer but experienced in the analysis of human behavior. It's a real shock to watch the computerchess freaks siding with thieves and jerks instead of learning some chess with the help of the best tested program on the market. I mean do they play chess at all? Or is computerchess for these beancounters the collecting of automatic engine games over night? Either you play chess, then you have no time to get into crimes. Of course if you belong to the many fan gangs for the different commercial dinos of course then perhaps you participate in character assassinations. Nothing bad with that. It's a different sport
however.

[solis]

See these posts by Vas in the rybka forum:



-/- By Vasik Rajlich (*****) alt="[hu]" class=flg title=Hungary> Date 2008-01-11 12:26


In light of the above, I am claiming Strelka 2.0 as my own and will release it in the next few days under my own name. The name of the author with the pen name "Osipov" will be included if he comes forward with hiw own real name, otherwise an anonymous contribution will be noted. The contributions of Igor Korshunov will also be confirmed and noted if appropriate. All usage permissions will be granted with this release.

Vas







By Vasik Rajlich (*****) [pl] Date 2008-08-27 14:55

> And one of them was Vasik Rajlich. He claimed Strelka to be his own. Now is it or is it not?


I made quite a detailed post about this around the time of the Strelka 2.0 release, maybe someone can dig it up.

Claiming Strelka as my own would have been illegal, so I didn't do it.

Vas

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi,

I am not up to date (computer chess in the latest three years).

Is the engine Strelka by yourself ?

In different available tourney results I can see Strelka 2 results. I saw also a version 3 can be donwloaded. But I can't find Strelka 3 results in tourneys by users.

On which program based Strelka version 2 and 3.
Is Strelka a completly own developement?
Is Strelka actual or is the developement stopped?

Perhaps I have a wrong information and you aren't the programmer of Strelka. In this case my abology for the message.

Yesterday I search a little bit for information but I don't see a clear information.

Best
Frank

[Watchman]

1. Strelka was released.

2. Vas said "this is a reverse-engineered program that was derived by disassembling Rybka 1. I hereby claim this code as my own."

3. Now there is a publicly available copy of Rybka 1 (AKA strelka here) source code.

4. The similarities between fruit and strelka were startling, to say the least. Very oddball program structures. Duplicate (and odd) function names. Duplicate piece/square tables This gave a _direct_ link from Fruit to Rybka 1. A few (Zach and others, even including myself to a limited degree) then studied the Rybka 1 executable to make sure that strelka matched reasonably well. And the rest is history.

What I find lamentable here is... There is no "Technical Paper, worthy of being published" documenting this (to my knowledge).

Obviously Dr. Hyatt, you are very well respected for your work and position... maybe it was something (this Technical Paper) that would take more time than it was worth to create.

I personally find plagiarism very distasteful; so much so (in this case) I would reconsider ever purchasing another version of Rybka. I would think for many to commit to such a thing is not likely. But a technical paper that clearly demonstrated Rybka 1.x copying sections of code might be enough to have Rybka X.x banned from further tournaments. I don't think this is tattling or snitching. A peer review would seem to be in order. This would also have the effect of disqualifying derivatives of Rybka (Fruit of the Poisonous Tree... if you will).

My view is, until some sort of paper is written and Rybka remains "on top" we will be condemned to rehashing this issue in various forums... a sort of human programming hell endless loop kind of thing.

[solis]

Cubeman wrote:
You trust Vas this much?then

Rob Osborne answered:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:58 pm Post subject: Re: morality and legality of dowloading robbolito

Reply to topic Reply with quoteSure. Why not. What reason has he given me not to trust his word?

[solis]

Cubeman wrote:
You trust Vas this much?
Rob Osborne answered:
Why not. What reason has he given me not to trust his word?
Rob:
Please see these posts by Vas in the rybka forum:
By Vasik Date 2008-01-11 12:26

In light of the above, I am claiming Strelka 2.0 as my own and will release it in the next few days under my own name. The name of the author with the pen name "Osipov" will be included if he comes forward with hiw own real name, otherwise an anonymous contribution will be noted. The contributions of Igor Korshunov will also be confirmed and noted if appropriate. All usage permissions will be granted with this release.
Vas
By Vasik Rajlich Date 2008-08-27 14:55
You claimed Strelka to be your own. Now is it or is it not?
I made quite a detailed post about this around the time of the Strelka 2.0 release, maybe someone can dig it up.
Claiming Strelka as my own would have been illegal, so I didn't do it.
Vas

Sorry I am still new in using quotations and putting them together

[Terry McCracken]

So building a bomb to destroy the computer chess community is the answer?

You people are immoral.