Frayer's opinion expressed at the Rybka forum....

[kurt]

Rolf,

Your displayed disrespect for Dr. R. Hyatt is simply put disgusting
and should not be tolerated at this site.

Moderators please revoke the posting privilege
for this member under the user name Rolf.
Enough is enough!

Courteously,
kurt

[bob]

Rolf, you are now looking like a complete moron.

You have argued each of the following:

(1) Vas did not copy fruit. This is proven because rybka is stronger.

(2) Vas purchased the code from Fabien.

(3) Vas copied a version prior to the GPL version.

(4) Vas took public domain (keeping it shortest)

Moron

And any one of the above instantly disqualifies him from participating in any future online tournament, or in ICGA tournaments, etc. You _do_ realize that, right? You are doing him way more harm than good here...

As if that would be my guideline. You _do_ realise that you have no more argument? I mentioned these 4 possibilities (just a small sample) to prove you wrong that your seemingly outstanding proof is the only explanation of the facts you presented. Do you see the difference between us? I must not fear anything what you could really prove, but I will not buy anything of what you are presenting here if _other_ explanations existed. Is such an average process so totally unknown for you, that you must unfairly attack me all day and night? Get real! I have nothing to win in this topic and I am not guided by interests. Your explanation is valid or not. For me it's invalid. Even illogical.

I doubt you could recognize a valid argument if it slipped up behind you and bit you on the a** and said "look at me, I am valid..." So I won't argue that point. But copying softawre is _invalid_. It doesn't matter where it was copied from, the status of the program it was copied from, nor anything else. That is simply called "plagiarism" by any definition one could use. Unless one properly cites the copied code, and the original author, and includes it "with permission". Then it would not be plagiarism, but it would be cause to disallow that program to compete in computer chess events. So here it is "damned if he did, or damned if he did." since neither explanation is acceptable...

As far as comparing fruit 2.1 source to rybka 1 beta binary, there are _no_ valid explanations other than code was copied from Fruit and included in Rybka 1 beta. So how about focusing on _that_ issue. That is enough. Even if the code that was copied also appears in fruit 2.0, or 1.0 or 0.001, it doesn't matter. Copied code is copied code, and there is no acceptable explanation or justification to calling such your own original work... None at all. And with proper citation, you are still stuck with respect to entering a derivative work in any computer chess event.

[bob]

I can only repeat for general purposes: everything what has been discussed or proposed by me ...

Your points are crushed factually, repeatedly and everlastingly. Yet in the spaceship of your imagination, your argumentum ad nauseam trumps all because you speak it ex cathedra.

But as much as you'd like us all to join you for the ride, we really can't afford the tickets.

I cant create with words what life and education couldnt achieve. I have nothing to win here but I can help that someone else is no longer diffamated and scapegoated. That's the best a man could achieve. At least this is what my teachers told me. If this were just easy as if I would buy me some icecream, then it wouldnt take a man to stand this. So, I dont care no matter how much they spit on me. How much they insult me. Matt, have I done what members here accuse Vas of? I am almost treated with much more hate than Vas himself. The lawyers of defendants in murder cases usually are treated with the same archaic hate and disgust. It's an interesting experience. Reminds of the Milgram reports.

Believe me, with friends like you, Vas needs _no_ enemies. He is in a hole here, and you are trying to get him out by standing _next_ to him and digging a hole to get to him. But, unfortunately, as you dig your access hole, you are burying him under all the dirt you are moving.

[Rolf]

Excuse me, if I ask you. Have you seen the insults of Prof Hyatt against *me*?* I fear you are confusing something. This is here a forum to debate different opinions. I have treated Bob always with respect. But I was insulted several times by him.

So basically you are thinking that a debate with arguments is wrong if it contradicts a famous expert? But what is with my expertis? I have studied such topics about theories and their falsification and so far. Should I not have the right to be respected as well?

Even if hundreds here were with Prof Hyatt against the author of Rybka, even then their arguments wouldnt become better. I am no judge. I dont know who exactly is right or wrong, but I argue here against weaker arguments that are taken as sort of proof against Vasik Rajlich. And I can show that they are not.

But even if Bob is right in the end, we all here had the right to debate, no?

Take a closer look, I have stated several times that I respected Bob and that I thanked him for his many answers. So, dont worry, we have a debate, but Bob enjoys it and I enjoy it too because I can learn from this man. But that having said I do not refuse to use my own head in the debate. Even if I'm wrong, I have a right to publish my opinions just like you too.

ad *)

I was insulted by Prof Hyatt as

idiot
moron
monkey
etc.

someone who needed to take his medication
etc.

NB as psychologist these insults dont really hurt me because I have a lot of experience with such misbehavior of patients in my profession. So dont worry about me but therefore the insults as such are not right.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Rolf, you are now looking like a complete moron.

You have argued each of the following:

(1) Vas did not copy fruit. This is proven because rybka is stronger.

(2) Vas purchased the code from Fabien.

(3) Vas copied a version prior to the GPL version.

(4) Vas took public domain (keeping it shortest)

Moron

And any one of the above instantly disqualifies him from participating in any future online tournament, or in ICGA tournaments, etc. You _do_ realize that, right? You are doing him way more harm than good here...

As if that would be my guideline. You _do_ realise that you have no more argument? I mentioned these 4 possibilities (just a small sample) to prove you wrong that your seemingly outstanding proof is the only explanation of the facts you presented. Do you see the difference between us? I must not fear anything what you could really prove, but I will not buy anything of what you are presenting here if _other_ explanations existed. Is such an average process so totally unknown for you, that you must unfairly attack me all day and night? Get real! I have nothing to win in this topic and I am not guided by interests. Your explanation is valid or not. For me it's invalid. Even illogical.

I doubt you could recognize a valid argument if it slipped up behind you and bit you on the a** and said "look at me, I am valid..." So I won't argue that point. But copying softawre is _invalid_. It doesn't matter where it was copied from, the status of the program it was copied from, nor anything else. That is simply called "plagiarism" by any definition one could use. Unless one properly cites the copied code, and the original author, and includes it "with permission". Then it would not be plagiarism, but it would be cause to disallow that program to compete in computer chess events. So here it is "damned if he did, or damned if he did." since neither explanation is acceptable...

As far as comparing fruit 2.1 source to rybka 1 beta binary, there are _no_ valid explanations other than code was copied from Fruit and included in Rybka 1 beta. So how about focusing on _that_ issue. That is enough. Even if the code that was copied also appears in fruit 2.0, or 1.0 or 0.001, it doesn't matter. Copied code is copied code, and there is no acceptable explanation or justification to calling such your own original work... None at all. And with proper citation, you are still stuck with respect to entering a derivative work in any computer chess event.

Stop arguing with this sectarian freak Bob,he's way too beneath you in every aspect....
Dr.D

[bob]

And it is so easy. I did a little research and read about Fabien in late 2005. A guy somewhat insecure, with several options to chose. Once he gave a code for free, then he sold it, then he GPL'd it. But what is if Vas received code that was NOT GPL?

The statement below is from Vas on the Rybka forum. There is no doubt whatsoever that you have seen the statement.

Parent - N/- By Vasik Rajlich (Bronze) [pl] Date 2009-12-01 09:10
Once again: Rybka is 100% original at the source code level, not counting public-domain snippets like population cnt, etc.

You made your suggestion that Vas might have paid for Rybka code when you knew that he denied using Rybka code. Are you now telling us that you think that Vas is a liar?

Rolf is so confused lately that he can't understand this simple fact....actualy in his willing to to hold Vasik's position in this debate,he started to make things up and it's definitely like shooting his own feet....all the sane members of this forum is all over him and sooner than later he'll quit and a little bit later Rybka will start to drop down from numero uno in all the rating lists....
Dr.D

Reminds me of the old "what a wicked web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" from Shakespear. He is now arguing with himself as much as with anyone else, and he has not yet realized that.

[bob]

This is all irrelevant. There are parts of code that appear in Fruit 2.1, that also appear in Rybka 1 beta. That's all there is to it. Nothing else matters. Explanations are irrelevant. Imagination is irrelevant. This is a statement of fact, and there is no justification for this happening. So all these side-issues and imaginary explanations are completely useless.

Interesting claim: If Fabien took public domain into Fruit 2.1. and Bob finds it in Rybka 1 beta too, then it's by definition (by Bob) no longer public domain because Fabien put 2.1. under GPL. Aha. That was something I didnt know yet. But it clarifies why computerchess is so to speak absolutel sterilized of all copying and stealing code which is such a mess in all parts of the World outside computerchess.

Please lock up your keyboard so that monkey can not get to it...

Wasn't intended to be funny. arguing with Rolf is bad enough. Arguing with a monkey is pointless. You just get random text spit back at you.

[Rolf]

Wasn't intended to be funny. arguing with Rolf is bad enough. Arguing with a monkey is pointless. You just get random text spit back at you.

So, you are an expert for analysing similarities between Rolf and a monkey too? Who is speaking to you right now?

[bob]

Excuse me, if I ask you. Have you seen the insults of Prof Hyatt against *me*?* I fear you are confusing something. This is here a forum to debate different opinions. I have treated Bob always with respect. But I was insulted several times by him.

So basically you are thinking that a debate with arguments is wrong if it contradicts a famous expert? But what is with my expertis? I have studied such topics about theories and their falsification and so far. Should I not have the right to be respected as well?

Even if hundreds here were with Prof Hyatt against the author of Rybka, even then their arguments wouldnt become better. I am no judge. I dont know who exactly is right or wrong, but I argue here against weaker arguments that are taken as sort of proof against Vasik Rajlich. And I can show that they are not.

But even if Bob is right in the end, we all here had the right to debate, no?

Take a closer look, I have stated several times that I respected Bob and that I thanked him for his many answers. So, dont worry, we have a debate, but Bob enjoys it and I enjoy it too because I can learn from this man. But that having said I do not refuse to use my own head in the debate. Even if I'm wrong, I have a right to publish my opinions just like you too.

ad *)

I was insulted by Prof Hyatt as

idiot
moron
monkey
etc.

someone who needed to take his medication
etc.

NB as psychologist these insults dont really hurt me because I have a lot of experience with such misbehavior of patients in my profession. So dont worry about me but therefore the insults as such are not right.

And you don't consider it insulting to continue to claim that I am biased, that I "hate" Vas, that I am making things up, that I am not considering _all_ possible explanations, etc? As if I had never done this process previously???

Would a surgeon feel insulted if you looked over his shoulder and kept up with a steady stream of "that incision was too long..." "you forgot to clamp that bleeder". "you were a little rough on that retraction, you should have been more careful." "That tissue you removed looked healthy to me, why did you remove it and incur prolonged recovery time for this patient?" "You sure have had him unconscious for a long time, do you know what you are doing?" "It sure is risky to do a transfusion, are you sure he has lost enough blood to justify that?" This to a surgeon that has done this procedure 1,000 times or more...

That is _exactly_ what you are doing here.

[bob]

The reason you look like an idiot is quite simple: It is against all tournament rules to enter a program that is derived from another. Only an idiot would try any of these explanations, because each and every one is highly damning to Rybka and its ability to compete in chess tournaments.

It's time to let Vas speak for himself, if he chooses to do so. You are simply incompetent in this field and are hurting his reputation far more than is necessary.

It doesn't matter what was copied, version-wise. We looked at fruit 2.1, whether Fabien kept most of the 2.0 code in there (most likely) or not is completely irrelevant. Copying another author's source and claiming it as your own code is plagiarism in the simple case, and violates the GPL as well if the copied program was released under the GPL.

So, logically, if I offer a possible explanation what might have happened, you can claim that you looked at Fruit 2.1. and did find snippets of code that were also in Rybka 1 beta, and therefore can call me idiot? IMO your "looking at 2.1." sounds like a mantra that cannot be examined anymore?

Vas stated:

In Rybka is only original code and public domain.

Hence if you found something in Fruit 2.1. and it allegedly were in Rybka 1 beta, I would strongly advise to reflect if it could be public domain. Just with all due respect, Bob.

Idiot

Why don't you re-read his post? He explicitly mentioned things like "PopCnt" and such. Not evaluation and search code which _everybody_ knows can not be copied.