Rybka online........ A HORRIBLE idea!!!!!

[Harvey Williamson]

If he does so, you don't have to buy your own cluster any more but can hire his, with all the advantages that you don't have to maintain it. It's very likely that because of this you will get better worth for your money. And, maybe he hopes some professional players/federations will use it, because now none of them uses hardware/engine parameter tuning because, well, they need someone who would maintain it.

That is fine if you are not interested in running any other engines at full power. The moment rybka is no longer number 1 this model will fail. I also see a major problem for the testers how will we get a true rating for 'cloud' Rybka? As a correspondence player with 2400+ rating i would never use only one 1 engine for advice no matter how big the hardware.

[K I Hyams]

I just now found out, to my astonishment, that this is about to be implemented, and at great costs for usage (maybe even 750 euro per year).
It will GREATLY ruin my interest in Rybka 4, and greatly ruin the whole hobby.
I can think of many terrible things this will cause.
I really hope it will be cancelled.

Please tell us more about the terrible things it can cause.

Without knowing the details, it is possible to imagine a situation in which it may have an undesirable effect on top-level correspondence chess.

How? Right now if you're very rich you can buy hardware which is >>>> regular player's hardware which gives you an advantage. Is this any different between being rich and having access to an engine which gives you an advantage? I see no difference whatsoever.

Well, I expected that response. I wouldn't expect you to be able to see a difference without knowing the business models that he has in mind.

Most people can now afford a quad. Octals are very expensive. It is possible to compensate for the difference in output between a quad and an octal running similar software. However, if he gives people the option of a super-strong program, not available on the open market and running on a very large cluster, then those who can't afford to access it may be at a disadvantage of 200 or more points. Top correspondence players are often playing 20 or more games at a time. It could make the hobby very expensive indeed if one is to remain competitive.

This makes 0 sense. You can afford a quad. I can afford an octal. durrr can afford any hardware money can buy. Right now, money can buy advantage for me and much more money can buy much more advantage. What exactly are you complaining about?

What a strange question. It is blindingly obvious that we simply have a different concept of what constitutes a worthwhile competition.

[Rolf]

What a strange question. It is blindingly obvious that we simply have a different concept of what constitutes a worthwhile competition.

I always thought you were a native speaker, Keith. Anyway, I see it the way Andranik. He fully understood you and saw the contradiction. Because how can you even hesitate for a moment that in this new concept you had no disadvantage at all, what hardware is concerned. So that your chess is decisive. Here you have also a fine adviser in Rybka. I see absolutely no problem. But at home you always have a smaller hardware.

But now you begin to doubt that this concept is fair if someone cannot pay the high cost to be competitive. But what must players at home pay TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE? Does that not interest you? So for me you simply confused yourself in your own thinking what I wouldnt have expected also because you are so smart. But somehow I must have made a mistake, because I overvalued your speech.

I wouldnt have reacted but I was surprised seeing you with this directness on the basis that you are the one who erred.

This is a good example for me that we are all only humans who make all their mistakes at times. Once in a year in your case.

Fact is that the online principle helps those who cant afford all the many machines at homes. The rich wont have a problem anyway. Very democratic and fair concept.

Never ever have I had the chance to see a DEEP version of a profram on my laptop and I never ever saw a quad or octagon or cluster. I am very mobile here and there and therefore I ask myself how I could transport the big ones from one place toanother. With the online concept I have direct contact and without having to organise a porter because of my handicap.

So, really, Keith, here you have it the wrong way round but you claim that you make yourself doubts in favor of the poorer people. Honestly I am deceived.

[K I Hyams]

But now you begin to doubt that this concept is fair if someone cannot pay the high cost to be competitive. But what must players at home pay TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE? Does that not interest you? So for me you simply confused yourself in your own thinking what I wouldnt have expected also because you are so smart.

I am not as smart as you, Rolf. You can see value in what you write, I can't.

[Rolf]

But now you begin to doubt that this concept is fair if someone cannot pay the high cost to be competitive. But what must players at home pay TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE? Does that not interest you? So for me you simply confused yourself in your own thinking what I wouldnt have expected also because you are so smart.

I am not as smart as you, Rolf. You can see value in what you write, I can't.

Sorry, I saw value in what you normally wrote. I hope you see value in your messages too. Otherwise I wouldnt understand why you are so fast with your personal attacks, the above is just an example from today. I hope that you can be a competitive corr player soon.

[bob]

If he does so, you don't have to buy your own cluster any more but can hire his, with all the advantages that you don't have to maintain it. It's very likely that because of this you will get better worth for your money. And, maybe he hopes some professional players/federations will use it, because now none of them uses hardware/engine parameter tuning because, well, they need someone who would maintain it.

That is fine if you are not interested in running any other engines at full power. The moment rybka is no longer number 1 this model will fail. I also see a major problem for the testers how will we get a true rating for 'cloud' Rybka? As a correspondence player with 2400+ rating i would never use only one 1 engine for advice no matter how big the hardware.

There are ideas that are good, and there are ideas that make no sense. This is one of the latter. You put together a "super-cluster". Say even 64 nodes of octal-based machines. But the minute you have 64 people using this thing at the same time, each has no more power than a single octal. If you have 128 people using it at once, even less. How many let something run for a day or two? So this "cluster approach could actually give you highly _inferior_ hardware when you factor in other users.

It makes sense to stop reverse engineering. But it is not economically viable, I'll bet. free-market economics will dictate whether users are willing to spend the money to get something that is considerably slower than what it would be on their own dedicated hardware.

[bob]

I just now found out, to my astonishment, that this is about to be implemented, and at great costs for usage (maybe even 750 euro per year).
It will GREATLY ruin my interest in Rybka 4, and greatly ruin the whole hobby.
I can think of many terrible things this will cause.
I really hope it will be cancelled.

Please tell us more about the terrible things it can cause.

Without knowing the details, it is possible to imagine a situation in which it may have an undesirable effect on top-level correspondence chess.

How? Right now if you're very rich you can buy hardware which is >>>> regular player's hardware which gives you an advantage. Is this any different between being rich and having access to an engine which gives you an advantage? I see no difference whatsoever.

Well, I expected that response. I wouldn't expect you to be able to see a difference without knowing the business models that he has in mind.

Most people can now afford a quad. Octals are very expensive. It is possible to compensate for the difference in output between a quad and an octal running similar software. However, if he gives people the option of a super-strong program, not available on the open market and running on a very large cluster, then those who can't afford to access it may be at a disadvantage of 200 or more points. Top correspondence players are often playing 20 or more games at a time. It could make the hobby very expensive indeed if one is to remain competitive.

I think you are not thinking this through. What kind of cluster do you think they will offer? Say a 128 node box as we have? Half-million dollars worth of hardware? But what happens when you have 128 people using it at the _same_ time? You get no more power than what you would get from a single 8-core box, which is quite cheap today.

The idea of a big system sounds attractive, until you look at it realistically and try to estimate what fraction of the thing you will get. How many simultaneous users are realistic? I know correspondence players that let a computer run for 24 hours at a time on one game. Will 128 people access this thing at once? You get an octal-core equivalent, nothing special. 256? You get a quad-core. Really normal hardware today. 512 at once? Now you get a dual core and anybody can buy hardware faster than that.

Sounds good until you think about what it _really_ means.

[Rolf]

I know correspondence players that let a computer run for 24 hours at a time on one game. Will 128 people access this thing at once? You get an octal-core equivalent, nothing special. 256? You get a quad-core. Really normal hardware today. 512 at once? Now you get a dual core and anybody can buy hardware faster than that. Sounds good until you think about what it _really_ means.

Could you do somewhat of the maths, if they offer 10 or more clusters. When could we have a balance between high power usage and cheaper but weaker. I understood Vas that he thinks that the 24/7 care for everything running is also not a little improvement to the home versions. Ok I added my special situation with a handicap, how do you travel with your cluster? Actually I am happy with a laptop.

But overall I hope you agree, that it's quite a bit funny how corr players are seeking hardest hardware. I thought corr were dead. Sorry, I didnt want to hurt players.

[bob]

I know correspondence players that let a computer run for 24 hours at a time on one game. Will 128 people access this thing at once? You get an octal-core equivalent, nothing special. 256? You get a quad-core. Really normal hardware today. 512 at once? Now you get a dual core and anybody can buy hardware faster than that. Sounds good until you think about what it _really_ means.

Could you do somewhat of the maths, if they offer 10 or more clusters. When could we have a balance between high power usage and cheaper but weaker. I understood Vas that he thinks that the 24/7 care for everything running is also not a little improvement to the home versions. Ok I added my special situation with a handicap, how do you travel with your cluster? Actually I am happy with a laptop.

But overall I hope you agree, that it's quite a bit funny how corr players are seeking hardest hardware. I thought corr were dead. Sorry, I didnt want to hurt players.

No way to have the numbers. How many correspondence players would use this? You do realize that a 128 node cluster is a half-million dollars plus? They are not going to make enough money to buy that kind of hardware, that's dreaming. Time to come back down to planet earth.

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

No way to have the numbers. How many correspondence players would use this? You do realize that a 128 node cluster is a half-million dollars plus? They are not going to make enough money to buy that kind of hardware, that's dreaming. Time to come back down to planet earth.

128 quad-nodes * 500 EURO/node (includes interconnect) = 64 000 EUR, or about 1/10th of what you claim.

Note that if you actually *have* 128 people using it simultaneously, the economics work in favor of just buying more hardware. Really, hardware can't be the problem there. If you run out of it, it's because you've got "too much" customers. How exactly is that a problem? I'd say it's the goal!