ethical dilemma

[Rolf]

You're right, there's no fair play anymore, and unfortunate truth.

I think when you go commercial there are somethings you can't share but to be fair you should stick around and help as you did and share insights with others without having to give away something important that would jeopardise your business.

Terry

Vas sticks around like no other commercial guy. How much can we hear from Anthony? They are almost autistic but Vas is here and everywhere and he communicates also with no-names, also like Bob did and still does.

[playjunior]

I think there is gross misunderstanding between the same terms Bob and Rolf use. For example, when Bob says: "Vasik does not communicate", he means-he invents material imbalance tables, does not tell anyone, hides search depth, hides node count, and everyone thinks he has invented some super-buper position evaluation. He doesn't tell, he misleads. Bob is disappointed because besides the things Vas has invented, he has learned, used, asked and thus acquired other knowledge that probably makes 99% of his engine.
Note that I don't say that this does not make him a genius. But I fully understand why Bob is not very excited about this particular genius.

When Rolf says "Vasik communicates", he means: I posted a bug in Rybka forum and he said thank you. As there is no Zappa forum to post the bugs, we thus conclude that Vasik is communicative, nice guy while Antony is "almost autistic".

Nevertheless, even if Vasik's behavior has not been the most sympathetic(at least to some people, like Bob), my personal opinion is that
what Osipov has done qualifies as theft.

[Rolf]

I think there is gross misunderstanding between the same terms Bob and Rolf use. For example, when Bob says: "Vasik does not communicate", he means-he invents material imbalance tables, does not tell anyone, hides search depth, hides node count, and everyone thinks he has invented some super-buper position evaluation. He doesn't tell, he misleads. Bob is disappointed because besides the things Vas has invented, he has learned, used, asked and thus acquired other knowledge that probably makes 99% of his engine.
Note that I don't say that this does not make him a genius. But I fully understand why Bob is not very excited about this particular genius.

When Rolf says "Vasik communicates", he means: I posted a bug in Rybka forum and he said thank you. As there is no Zappa forum to post the bugs, we thus conclude that Vasik is communicative, nice guy while Antony is "almost autistic".

Nevertheless, even if Vasik's behavior has not been the most sympathetic(at least to some people, like Bob), my personal opinion is that
what Osipov has done qualifies as theft.

Thanks for that distinction. Partially I agree with you but if that would describe alone why I am so engaged even against Bob in defense of Vasik, then I wouldnt have a real reason to argue indeed.

But it's much more. BTW I dont mean Zappa in special because Anthony is also communicative and SMK too in that sense what you described. With Amir I had many political debates too, that is no question.

The reason why I defend Vasik against such no-giver criticism, that is that he gives much more than all others together. The way he reacts is so thoughtful and friendly. He can motivate you. You feel as being part of a bigger whole. Basically he has a very deep approach full of humanity. And that to achieve is a big performance on the net. Because on the net you have always also the negative people. And nobody achieves to remain completely immune against such negativity. But in Vas' behavior on the net you can feel that he stands above such influences. That is simnilar to Bob's almost 24/7 readiness to answer questions and to explain although nobody can cope with Bob in that respect. However Bob has academic time ressources which is a big privilege.

Now nobody should calculate that sort of emphatic cleverness as something little in a sphere where we have envy and sarcasm all day long.

[Andrej Sidorov]

my personal opinion is that what Osipov has done qualifies as theft.

My personal opinion is that this words are slander as long as nobody show any evidences of any Osipov's guilt. Only "evidence" I've seen is "Vasik told so".

[Rolf]

my personal opinion is that what Osipov has done qualifies as theft.

My personal opinion is that this words are slander as long as nobody show any evidences of any Osipov's guilt. Only "evidence" I've seen is "Vasik told so".

How can you say this if nobody even knows who is or who are O! How could one commit slander against a hidden offender organisation? What logic are you adopting? You want full judicial respect and protection but likewise you condone anonymous attacks? The reason why 'Vasik told so' is so strong is that Vas is open and real. O is ___ to be exact. I leave out the term for now because I dont want to alarm the moderation board. BTW you like that role here of speaking on behalf of anonymous offenders? And you expect repect and everything, correct?

[Mike S.]

nobody show any evidences

Since May 2007, a lot of evidences have been shown. Many positions & engineoutput from both with same bugs, same strange moves... If you don't know these evidences it is either because you don't WANT to know them, or because you didn't search. Search and you will find PLENTY of evidences, here or by Google.

(Unfortunately, if you search you will also find plenty of nonsense which has been written )

[Andrej Sidorov]

Since May 2007, a lot of evidences have been shown. Many positions & engineoutput from both with same bugs, same strange moves...

This is not evidences of anything.

[Rolf]

Since May 2007, a lot of evidences have been shown. Many positions & engineoutput from both with same bugs, same strange moves...

This is not evidences of anything.

But O is evidence?

[Andrej Sidorov]

to Rolf:
For some obvious reasons I don't even read your posts anymore, so you are free not to argue with me.

[Mike S.]

Since May 2007, a lot of evidences have been shown. Many positions & engineoutput from both with same bugs, same strange moves...

This is not evidences of anything.

Just as I suspected. You simply DON'T WANT to to accept it. Thx for acknowledgement.

It is clear evidence, since the first moment when Strelka was released. Even more, Rybkin didn't deny it anyway, he openly EXPLAINED how he created that clone. That is the absurd side of this discussion.

The Strelka discussions lift stupidity and malice to new record levels. One of the old masters said something like, "there is no intelligence required whatsoever, to play chess." - Strelka discussions remove any doubt about that.