GPL infringement

[chrisw]

Look, can you find Rybka 1.6.1? It is the last version before 1.0 Beta.

http://www.open-aurec.com/chesswar/Ches ... 006DSt.htm

I am sure Vas would be able to write such a strong engine that is Rybka right now without violating the GPL. The question is, how fast?

What if he would need 5 years, Shredder 16, Hiarcs, Fritz, Toga... would maybe have passed him. So if he took Fruit as a start he not just violated GPL, he harmed other programmers.

Well here you dangerously connect the two sides to the anti-argument, possibly not intentionally, but connect nevertheless ....

1. Vas engine is too strong in too short a time. Implication: this not possible without stealing ideas/code.

2. Vas allegedly violated GPL. But *no* examples of engine code produced, unsurprisingly because one engine is bitboard and the other not.

The objective of the anti-camp alleging and processing evidence of GPL breach in UCI/user interface/parameter passing/non AI parts of Rybka is to then make the leap to the engine, that (1) above queries.

But, antis have absolutely NO evidence relating to the engine, and all evidence is that it must be utterly different since the fundamental data structures are fundamentally different.

Talk of Rybka unable to progress so far, so fast, is just speculative conjecture, no more and no less.

[Zach Wegner]

But, antis have absolutely NO evidence relating to the engine, and all evidence is that it must be utterly different since the fundamental data structures are fundamentally different.

How very wrong.

[chrisw]

But, antis have absolutely NO evidence relating to the engine, and all evidence is that it must be utterly different since the fundamental data structures are fundamentally different.

How very wrong.

So far only some root search which is borderline. No genuine AI. Not published by your side anyway.

[Alexander Schmidt]

1. Vas engine is too strong in too short a time. Implication: this not possible without stealing ideas/code.

I never took this as a evidence, its of course not... It was as answer to the previous post, talking about the strength of Rybka.

The objective of the anti-camp alleging and processing evidence of GPL breach in UCI/user interface/parameter passing/non AI parts of Rybka is to then make the leap to the engine, that (1) above queries.

It will not become true if you repeat this all the time It don't matter which part and how much of GPL code is taken. It's about fairness.

GPL is thought to get a strong project, not to help single persons. Every programmer knows this, and should start from scratch and not from a GPL code.

[Zach Wegner]

So far only some root search which is borderline. No genuine AI. Not published by your side anyway.

And all of the low level details about board representation and hashing don't count?

What exactly is "genuine AI"?

[Alexander Schmidt]

What exactly is "genuine AI"?

What is added to fruit

[chrisw]

So far only some root search which is borderline. No genuine AI. Not published by your side anyway.

And all of the low level details about board representation and hashing don't count?

What exactly is "genuine AI"?

the evaluation function
the smart parts of the search which prune and extend
smart parts which use knowledge from other bits of the tree, hashing and so on

move/unmove/genmove are mostly technical, forced by the rules of chess, cunning prograqmming can make them faster, but not intelligent, on the whole.

[Dave Acevedo]

I dont know what code may be transfered to where but I would like to see honesty rule the day. If your engine has others parts in it just say so. The goal is that all of the resulting ratings should be genuine and the way they were obtained clear.

[tiger]

What exactly is "genuine AI"?

What is added to fruit

Of course. That is the reasoning that will render any investigation completely irrelevant.

- Show us the common parts between Fruit 2.1 and Rybka 1.0 in the "AI".
- OK, look at this.
- No no no. If it is in both programs it cannot be the AI because Rybka is stronger than Fruit. Show me another part.
(audience applauding)
...(loop ad nauseam)...



// Christophe

[chrisw]

What exactly is "genuine AI"?

What is added to fruit

Of course. That is the reasoning that will render any investigation completely irrelevant.

- Show us the common parts between Fruit 2.1 and Rybka 1.0 in the "AI".
- OK, look at this.
- No no no. If it is in both programs it cannot be the AI because Rybka is stronger than Fruit. Show me another part.
(audience applauding)
...(loop ad nauseam)...

// Christophe

Christophe,

You're spending much time at the moment telling why further investigation is useless.