Graham Banks wrote:
Larry Kaufmann posted the following in the Rybka forum:
Well, to be precise a new program that was clearly made by decompiling Rybka 3 and putting it back together with changes to the evaluation function published its source code. So not the entire R3 code is public, but most of it other than the exact evaluation function is. The "author" does not publicly admit that his program was taken from R3, but Vas has said so and I can tell you that the similarities are so overwhelming that any claim to the contrary is a joke.
Now let's see Larry get ripped to pieces here also.
Of course, because no proof has been posted that Robbo is a Rybka clone, I imagine that the mods will still allow links to it?
Didn't Gian-Carlo Pascutto (Deep Sjeng author) also state that Vas had been shafted?
The Hiarcs forum will also not allow games of the clone or links to it.
It would seem that the anti-Vas, anti-Rybka views of many who post here have been allowed to override the legally questionable status of Robbo.
Graham Banks wrote:It would seem that the anti-Vas, anti-Rybka views of many who post here have been allowed to override the legally questionable status of Robbo.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post, but I do want to clarify one thing. There is no connection between being anti-Rybka or anti-Vas and being ok with Robbo. I can't speak for others, but certainly I'm happy with all 3.
Graham Banks wrote:It would seem that the anti-Vas, anti-Rybka views of many who post here have been allowed to override the legally questionable status of Robbo.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post, but I do want to clarify one thing. There is no connection between being anti-Rybka or anti-Vas and being ok with Robbo. The two are not mutually exclusive. I can't speak for others, but certainly I'm in that camp.
Even if you believed these well respected people (add in Don Dailey plus a few other programmers) who've stated that Robbo has come from Rybka code, would you still be supporting it or using it?
Graham Banks wrote:Even if you believed these well respected people (add in Don Dailey plus a few other programmers) who've stated that Robbo has come from Rybka code, would you still be supporting it or using it?
I do believe them. I've been working with the robbo code for a while now. There's no doubt about it in my mind. So what? The answer is, yes I would.
Graham Banks wrote:Even if you believed these well respected people (add in Don Dailey plus a few other programmers) who've stated that Robbo has come from Rybka code, would you still be supporting it or using it?
I do believe them. I've been working with the robbo code for a while now. There's no doubt about it in my mind. So what? The answer is, yes I would.
You support Robbo even though you know it's the clone of a commercial engine and that the coward who posted the code won't even put his name to having done so? That's sad.
Graham Banks wrote:You support Robbo even though you know it's the clone of a commercial engine and that the coward who posted the code won't even put his name to having done so? That's sad. :cry:
What am I supposed to do, bury my head in the sand and pretend it will go away? The source is out on the net. It will never go away no matter how much anyone tries to boycott it or condemn those responsible.
Graham Banks wrote:You support Robbo even though you know it's the clone of a commercial engine and that the coward who posted the code won't even put his name to having done so? That's sad.
What am I supposed to do, bury my head in the sand and pretend it will go away? The source is out on the net. It will never go away no matter how much anyone tries to boycott it or condemn those responsible.
Supporting its development and distribution is surely different to purely studying it?
Graham Banks wrote:Supporting its development and distribution is surely different to purely studying it?
I haven't released any of my work. I mentioned on one programming thread how I got bitscans working for MIPS. Aside from that, I haven't really supported any development of it outside my own personal toying with the code.
Graham Banks wrote:Supporting its development and distribution is surely different to purely studying it?
I haven't released any of my work. I mentioned on one programming thread how I got bitscans working for MIPS. Aside from that, I haven't really supported any development of it outside my own personal toying with the code.
Fair enough. As you say, it's out there, so as a programmer it would be silly not to look at it. At least you're not further harming a fellow programmer by helping to develop it further for distribution.
Because you've admitted to knowing that Ippo and Robbo are based on Rybka code, do you think it's right that CCC should be allowing the sharing of ideas about it or links to it?
Graham Banks wrote:Because you've admitted to knowing...
You make it sound like I was deliberately suppressing it, or that I ever had any other opinion. I assure you neither is true.
Graham Banks wrote:Because you've admitted to knowing that Ippo and Robbo are based on Rybka code, do you think it's right that CCC should be allowing the sharing of ideas about it or links to it?
I didn't press the mods when they decided to treat it as legally questionable. I won't now. If they change their minds again, I still won't. [Edit, I did question if links to objectionable material were the same as questionable material. That's not the same as condemning them for their decision.]
Is it right? That's debatable, and I can swing either way on it. Fact is it's going to happen regardless. The sites who blacklist robbo are simply going to get less traffic and interest over time.
Last edited by bnemias on Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
