Rybka Investigation : Survey Of Evidence

[LucenaTheLucid]

Amazing work Adam. I believe it is critical for the laymen in this and other forum to remain neutral.

[Rebel]

IMO, it would be more useful to organise it as a web page (or web site) with sections and hyperlinks than as a monolithic text file in a 7-zip archive file.

I'm sorry, Paul. That would require a skill set that I have never taken the time to acquire.

I am happy to do it if you wish.

[Rolf]

None of the commentary on the investigation and subsequent debate has provided a neutral point of view

Excuse me, either I am misunderstanding your English or my own yearlong critic of the whole style chosen by people like Bob Hyatt on the accusing side is too difficult to understand for amateur thinkers.

My position has no other "bias", meaning it's without any bias at all, when I stand on the norms of our classical and ethical system of justice and NOT lynch justice as it's practiced all over the places to the disadvantage of innocent Vas Rajlich.

In our law system we have the fundamental law which says "IN DUBIO PRO REO", so I beg everybody at first to get help for being able to understand this basic. Second requirement, only in a legal court case the final verdict could change this state of innocence into guilt. What we have seen here for more than 5 years and also in the last year's secretariat & panel of the ICGA is that the accusing side made the trial all alone and their President declared his verdict of a life sentence which alone is a totally unknown punishment in the world of sports not even talking about the sphere of Justice and Law.

Adam please note, in our system of justice the defendent isnt forced to defend his innocence but the attorneys and judges must seek clear and unrefutable reasons for a verdict. Even a silent defendant cannot be taken into special treatment or torture so that he could confess. All this of course is known from the Middle Ages and their processes of the inquisition. But that was ages ago. For more than 1000 years we now have the strict basic "IN DUBIO PRO REO".

You mention all the three or more forums and their different messages. Except the repetition of the basic requirements by me in personal and some very few others all members talked about their speculations or partial certainties what doesnt make it right in the bigger picture of the requirements of a court case in our civilized part of the world.

We ourself had lynch justice, inquisition and blood revenge but today we believe into "IN DUBIO PRO REO" which is meant to protect the human rights of every human being that came under suspicion of some deviant behavior. If we think about the possibility that we also could come under suspicion very easily due to rumors then we would directly hope that we have protection for our innocence.

Basically all who are bad-mouthing Vas and his Rybka are insulting themselves because they are unable to put themselves into the position under suspicion like Vas. Of course we are bigots at times. But normally this is not a favorable choice forever.

To sum this up I would wish that we all would more seek understanding for the possible flaws in our own thoughts and behavior rather than showing alleged certainty and pompous emptiness.

Make no mistake. If we had not thrown him out, Vas would still be here among us, perhaps in a seperate sub forum because of the huge traffic around Rybka (although Hiarcs has its own forum too since long).

Please Adam dont you mix up all and everything together. What I presented here was not something biased pro or contra but it was in the defense of our system of justice and this forbids prejudgements and private trials or defendents without a defense, not to speak of persons who are acting on all sides of the conflict as police, firemen and judges. Is it possible to understand what I tried to say?

[geots]

Amazing work Adam. I believe it is critical for the laymen in this and other forum to remain neutral.

Luis, i cannot agree there, for 2 reasons. 1. If a murder case hinged on forensics and other DNA evidence, all 12 jurors cannot be forensic experts. It will be lay people. 2. I would think that the Marks, Zach, Hyatt and Levy would be qualified. OTOH- I think Ed, Miguel, Sven, Soren and Whitty are just as well qualified. They have all looked at it- and see 2 different things. So what do you propose now. No matter what- neither side is going to budge.
I have heard the call for independent experts- but how do you get independent experts any less biased than Ed, Miguel and Sven. I know he is no programmer- but they should have listened to Conkie at the start. This is exactly what he predicted.


Best,

george


PS: This poll is the most stupid thing since my first wedding.

[Rebel]

- but they should have listened to Conkie at the start. This is exactly what he predicted.

That's quite interesting, what did Christopher say ?

And there is Rolf, he predicted right from the beginning, that this case if continued it would split the CC community into parts.

[Steve B]

i think there is a reason for this divise split and it really has nothing to do with the Rybka program per se
Rybka has its own forum unlike any other engine that was ever found or accused of being a clone
the forum members have developed a sense of community and an attack on the program is viewed by them as an attack on the members and their integrity
after all..who wants to be a day to day posting member of a forum where the engine has fallen into disgrace?
..so they keep the issue alive ..day after day and now several months after the decision ..they send a non-engine programmer and moderator to go defend it on Playchess..(perhaps in anticipation of the Rybka 5 release)
take away the Rybka forum and i think the issue dies with the ICGA decision..perhaps not at first but by now certainly

i think if Houdini (for example) where investigated and found to be a clone there would be no-wheres the amount of debate because Houdart does not have his own forum devoted to the engine even though it currently is the strongest engine and has been for months now
i have on several occasions.. here on the CCC ..advised Houdart to start his own forum and then the day to day members of the forum will defend his program for him as they will have developed a sense of community as members of the forum

look at the Strelka affair
the program comes out..no forum behind it..
Rajlich calls it a clone and claims the program 'As His own" and walla we are done with it

IMHO Regards
Steve

[gerold]

i think there is a reason for this divise split and it really has nothing to do with the Rybka program per se
Rybka has its own forum unlike any other engine that was ever found or accused of being a clone
the forum members have developed a sense of community and an attack on the program is viewed by them as an attack on the members and their integrity
after all..who wants to be a day to day posting member of a forum where the engine has fallen into disgrace?
..so they keep the issue alive ..day after day and now several months after the decision ..they send a non-engine programmer and moderator to go defend it on Playchess..(perhaps in anticipation of the Rybka 5 release)
take away the Rybka forum and i think the issue dies with the ICGA decision..perhaps not at first but by now certainly

i think if Houdini (for example) where investigated and found to be a clone there would be no-wheres the amount of debate because Houdart does not have his own forum devoted to the engine even though it currently is the strongest engine and has been for months now
i have on several occasions.. here on the CCC ..advised Houdart to start his own forum and then the day to day members of the forum will defend his program for him as they will have developed a sense of community as members of the forum

look at the Strelka affair
the program comes out..no forum behind it..
Rajlich calls it a clone and claims the program 'As His own" and walla we are done with it

IMHO Regards
Steve

HI Steve. I use Strelka,Critter,Houdini. These are the 3 top engines on my list. Houdini as number one. Critter a very close second. I hardly ever use Rybka any more. If Rybka 5 comes out stronger than these 3 i will use it. There are about 10 engines that are number 4 or 5 within 30 elo. The people buying Rybka are the ones who will decide if it stays in the top 10 or if Vas can up the Elo.
I will test R5 if Vas gives me a free copy as he did before.

It seems the split is due to the fact that some are trying to say its ok to copy other people/s work as long as you do it manual and not copy and paste. Hahahaha. What a laugh.

Best,
Gerold.

[Roger Brown]

Sven,

I am extremely flattered by your compliment. You are one of the people in the community that I have great respect for (even if I don't always agree with you ).

Adam

Hello Adam,

100% agreement with that statement.

From my perspective, it also applies to you.

Later.

[Adam Hair]

None of the commentary on the investigation and subsequent debate has provided a neutral point of view

Excuse me, either I am misunderstanding your English or my own yearlong critic of the whole style chosen by people like Bob Hyatt on the accusing side is too difficult to understand for amateur thinkers.

My position has no other "bias", meaning it's without any bias at all, when I stand on the norms of our classical and ethical system of justice and NOT lynch justice as it's practiced all over the places to the disadvantage of innocent Vas Rajlich.

In our law system we have the fundamental law which says "IN DUBIO PRO REO", so I beg everybody at first to get help for being able to understand this basic. Second requirement, only in a legal court case the final verdict could change this state of innocence into guilt. What we have seen here for more than 5 years and also in the last year's secretariat & panel of the ICGA is that the accusing side made the trial all alone and their President declared his verdict of a life sentence which alone is a totally unknown punishment in the world of sports not even talking about the sphere of Justice and Law.

Adam please note, in our system of justice the defendent isnt forced to defend his innocence but the attorneys and judges must seek clear and unrefutable reasons for a verdict. Even a silent defendant cannot be taken into special treatment or torture so that he could confess. All this of course is known from the Middle Ages and their processes of the inquisition. But that was ages ago. For more than 1000 years we now have the strict basic "IN DUBIO PRO REO".

You mention all the three or more forums and their different messages. Except the repetition of the basic requirements by me in personal and some very few others all members talked about their speculations or partial certainties what doesnt make it right in the bigger picture of the requirements of a court case in our civilized part of the world.

We ourself had lynch justice, inquisition and blood revenge but today we believe into "IN DUBIO PRO REO" which is meant to protect the human rights of every human being that came under suspicion of some deviant behavior. If we think about the possibility that we also could come under suspicion very easily due to rumors then we would directly hope that we have protection for our innocence.

Basically all who are bad-mouthing Vas and his Rybka are insulting themselves because they are unable to put themselves into the position under suspicion like Vas. Of course we are bigots at times. But normally this is not a favorable choice forever.

To sum this up I would wish that we all would more seek understanding for the possible flaws in our own thoughts and behavior rather than showing alleged certainty and pompous emptiness.

Make no mistake. If we had not thrown him out, Vas would still be here among us, perhaps in a seperate sub forum because of the huge traffic around Rybka (although Hiarcs has its own forum too since long).

Please Adam dont you mix up all and everything together. What I presented here was not something biased pro or contra but it was in the defense of our system of justice and this forbids prejudgements and private trials or defendents without a defense, not to speak of persons who are acting on all sides of the conflict as police, firemen and judges. Is it possible to understand what I tried to say?

Hello Rolf,

Amateur thinker? Well, at least you used the term "thinker" in the description.

I would like to point out that your statements have not been limited to cautions against lynch mob mentality.

At any rate, I will reiterate my statement. There has not been a neutral assessment of all the evidence presented, so I have tried to provide that with my report.

As for the rest of your post, I hope you will allow me to wait until I return home this evening. This phone I am using at the moment impedes my ability to answer you properly (it is much easier to read posts than to reply).

Adam

[dj]

i think there is a reason for this divise split and it really has nothing to do with the Rybka program per se
Rybka has its own forum unlike any other engine that was ever found or accused of being a clone
the forum members have developed a sense of community and an attack on the program is viewed by them as an attack on the members and their integrity
after all..who wants to be a day to day posting member of a forum where the engine has fallen into disgrace?
..so they keep the issue alive ..day after day and now several months after the decision ..they send a non-engine programmer and moderator to go defend it on Playchess..(perhaps in anticipation of the Rybka 5 release)
take away the Rybka forum and i think the issue dies with the ICGA decision..perhaps not at first but by now certainly

i think if Houdini (for example) where investigated and found to be a clone there would be no-wheres the amount of debate because Houdart does not have his own forum devoted to the engine even though it currently is the strongest engine and has been for months now
i have on several occasions.. here on the CCC ..advised Houdart to start his own forum and then the day to day members of the forum will defend his program for him as they will have developed a sense of community as members of the forum

look at the Strelka affair
the program comes out..no forum behind it..
Rajlich calls it a clone and claims the program 'As His own" and walla we are done with it

IMHO Regards
Steve

I think you exaggerate the importance of having one's own forum. Rybka's popularity depends primarily on it being a commercial program (with two separate distributors and a lot of customers), being considerably stronger than all others over a prolonged period of time, and winning every computer chess tournament over a period of years.

If Houdini replicates all those elements over a period of years then any attack on it in, say, five years time would certainly see it defended by numerous people with or without a Houdini forum.

Your comments on Strelka miss the point. Strelka was dismissed not because of what Rajlich said but because large numbers of cc enthusiasts immediately suspected that it was a clone.