Levy's interview on Chessbase about ICGA/rybka

[Don]

...
(1) First of all their mathematical foolishness.
If you have 300 programmers (amateurs and pros) and gather 34 in a special ICGA panel and then only 16 voted, then even the result of 16-0 isnt a clear result at all. Levy says if it had been 9-7 then the staff should have taken some serious considerations out of doubt.

However this is against all knowledge coming from stats.

So you are saying instead of assuming a pretty obvious result of 16-0, we have to assume that all the others that did not voted are most likely pro Vas?

No, exactly this wasnt what I meant. I just wanted to mention the until now unknown reasons for their abstination. Dont waste so much time in computerchess. Take the political elections. You know that non voters are usually counted for the negative votes from opposition?

This is completely irrelevant. The motivation of the non-voters do not matter. It is in politics the same thing. When people decide not to vote (and hence have no direct input in the voting), that's their problem and their problem alone.
In the whole Rybka-issue it is even much easier. If a programmer (or hundreds of them) were able to provide reasonable proof that no wrongdoing by Vas was involved, they could have approached the panel and could have presented their evidence, and may have voted. Nobody did (not even Vas himself!).

False!

For instance, I did not participate because I could not allow myself to be associated with a process in which 2/3 members of the secretariat should have recused themselves. This was mentioned but they won't listen.
The whole process was flawed from the beginning.

Miguel

No, not false.

The motivation is irrelevant for the outcome. The fact that the process was flawed (which is to be expected in such a small and minor 'club') is irrelevant and should not affect participation.

It's your opinion that the process was flawed, don't state it as a fact.

I did primarily answer to the previous comments that the procedure was flawed. Myself, I do NOT think it was heavily flawed. I just think people should not expect a perfect procedure as this would be too much asked from such a small organization. It cannot be perfect at this level. Overall it was a quite good process IMHO (but not perfect).

I really didn't want to make it appear that I was addressing you except for this statement which I now assume you delivered almost tongue in cheek. I understand where you are coming from now.

It goes without saying that nothing is perfect however you could say that about things that are at a very high level too. I think the process was at a very high level. In fact I would be curious to see what improvement David Levy was talking about in the interview - I'm not sure what I would change without putting some thought into it.

I think what is happening is that people are saying, "I don't believe Vas is guilty, therefore the process is flawed."

Not really.

It was beyond flawed. A member of the Secretariat has been notoriously and publicly biased from the get go. That is unacceptable. He was the same who has declared that "guts" are good to detect clones (in other accusations), the same member who has been leaking information in a process that is supposed to be confidential. Another member of the secretariat is not even a programmer and he is a member of a direct competitor team... To make things worse, at the very moment that rybka 1.6 was found to have Crafty in it, Bob should have recused himself on the spot. That is the same silliness as having Fabien in the secretariat, in charge of writing the report. In addition, the final report misrepresented who signed and who did not and was written... and was not even circulated for final approval. Was it? and do not get me started in how the report was written.

I bet most (if not all) of the members of the panel had good intentions, but the behavior of the ICGA was, at best, incompetent. Several rules that you may expect to have in a cheating investigation were violated.

The only thing I ask myself is... Why do I freaking care.

The concept I'm having a LOT of trouble with is the concept that a whole bunch of people (at least 20) conspired to get Rybka removed so that they could win tournaments or that their "friends" could win tournaments. It just really seems bizarre beyond belief to me. And the theory being put forth is that there was NO evidence whatsoever, it was all just made up out of the wild blue and that they all conspired together to do that. Bob Hyatt, Ken Thompson, and many others are just corrupt thugs. I mean this is coming from people who I respected, I usually joke about people like that as being a little off balance or uneducated, such as flat-earthers and such.

I have yet to hear a coherent theory (let alone provable factual account) that makes any sense to me about how something like this would happen. It's especially odd when I was I saw the evidence and it was absolutely convincing to me. I know Ken Thompson and he is not a fool. Bob Hyatt is not a vindictive person, he takes enormous abuse without losing his cool and does not go after people that I have ever seen. I don't know Fabien at all so I cannot speak to why he would just go off the deep end and try to make claims that have absolutely no evidence whatsoever. He does not even compete and hasn't for a long time, is he known to also be of questionable character?

The Rybka supporters are asking a LOT to expect any reasonable person to go along with this (what seems to me) unbelievable conspiracy stuff.

I CAN see of course one or two jealous people trying to go after someone but not an entire group of respected people who put their reputation on the line. I cannot imagine Ken Thompson, the Bell creator and world renown computer scientist and Unix creator being sucked up into a purposeful lie for example.

Miguel

The next part is not particularly directed to you, I'm addressing the entire forum interested in this:

It's my opinion that the process was NOT flawed and if you read the Levy interview you will see that a great deal of effort was spent trying to ensure that it was fair.


Most of the basis for saying it was flawed is the idea that it was "heavily stacked" with direct competitors of Rybka, which is completely false. Look at the names again and count how many could have had a vested interest in seeing Vas go down. Maybe there were 3 who could be considered "threatened" by Rybka and then you have to assume all 3 are corrupt enough to lie about what they saw. I invite you to throw out all the names of the ones that you think are biased and then count the percentage left who were unfavorable to Rybka (hint: it will still be 100%)

Then you have to consider the fact that the panel members were not allowed to be involved in the decision other than in an advisory role. It's not like the panel voted unanimously to remove Vas from the competition, in fact we were NEVER EVEN ASKED what should be done, IF something should be done and we had no knowledge of what would actually be done if anything. It was our job to simply advise the board on what we saw. I have to say that because for years now we see forum posts saying that we "voted him out" or other similar stupidity.

Vas and Rybka are superstars in computer chess and it would NOT be in the ICGA's best interest to kick the top superstar out of computer chess since this is their bread and butter UNLESS there was a good reason.

I for one cannot understand how anyone could not be impressed with their integrity in this matter. Kicking the superstar out of the competition takes a great deal of fortitude and there is absolutely no reason they would be predisposed to wanting to do this.

One last point. If the ICGA really wanted to remove their superstar for no particularly reason other than just to "wield power" or to be "mean" they did not need to consult with ANYONE. They had the authority to do so but they didn't do it that way.

Your assertion that the process was "highly flawed" just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Calling it the "old boys club" is dirty tactics and does not contribute anything sensible to the argument, it's just name calling and is sophomoric and immature.

I agree.

[Rolf]

The concept

/BOB AND OTHERS HAVE A CEONCEPT AGAINST VAS BUT I HAVE NO CONCEPT THAT MUST BECOME TRUE I TAKE ALL FROM OBSERVATIONS NOT PREJUDICED CONCEPTS/

I'm having a LOT of trouble with is the concept that a whole bunch of people (at least 20) conspired to get Rybka removed

/THAT ISNT A CONCEPT OF SINIGULAR PEOPLE BUT IT COMES OUT OF THE PROCESS OF HOLDING SUCH EVENTS ITS EVIL BECAUSE IT DOESNT LEAVE HUMAN EMOTIONS OF RESPECT AND COMPASSION ALL WHAT WE CALL EMPATHY/

so that they could win tournaments or that their "friends" could win tournaments.

/SO YOU MISSED THE FACTUAL REALITY THAT THESE GUYS ALREADY IN HOURS HAD RECLAIMED THE MANY TITLES THEY COULD NOW CLAIM AFTER THE ICGA VERDICT WHERE WERE YOU DURING T&HQAT TIME WHEN IT HAQPPENED AND WHAT DID LQARRY RE$PORT TO YOU AQBOUT THAT SMEAR ACTION?/

It just really seems bizarre beyond belief to me.

/FOR ME WHAT IS BIZARRE THAT IS THATZ YOU COME WITH ALL THE NOVELTIES IN YOUR PROGRAM AND PRETENND INNOCENCE WHILE VAS IS BEING BEHEADED BY YOUR LIKE/

And the theory being put forth is that there was NO evidence whatsoever

/EVIDENCE ALONER DOESNT MAKE A LEGAL JUSTICE CASE BUT IT CAN QUICKLY BE PERVERTED INTO LYNCH JUSTICE WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE/

it was all just made up out of the wild blue and that they all conspired together to do that.

/NO IT WASNT OUT OF THE BLUE BUT IT WAS TOPIC OF A YEARLONG HATE CAMPAIGN LEAD BY BOB HYATT INCLUDED CHARACTER ASSASSINATION AND AN OBSESSED REPETOTION OF ALWAYS THE SAME INSULTS NOTE WELL THAT I DONT SAY THERE WASNT ANY REASON AT ALL TO MAKE AN INVESTIGATION; BUT THE WAYS OF THE PROCESS WAS INHUMAN AND WRONG ALSO IN THE LIGHT OF THAT FINAL END OF THE BAN/

Bob Hyatt, Ken Thompson, and many others are just corrupt thugs.

7NOBODY SAID THAT BUT ALSO A GENIUS LIKE THOMPSON IS NO CLAIRVOYANT: IN THE IBM SCANDAL HE WAS INVOLVED AND PLAYED THE ROLE OF THE DECEIVED COLLABORAQTOR WITHOUT ANY HELPFUL COMMENTARY ON THE SUPERIOR EVENTS IN DETAIL; THE SAME HERE; I READ THAT HE ASKED THIS DID YOU ASK VAS FOR HIS SOURCES AND THE ANSWER WAS NO; SO THAT I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED THAT A GENIUS WOULD LOOK THROUGH THE FATAL ERRORS OF THE WHOLE PROCESS; ITS NOT THE QUESTION GENIUS OR THUG/

I mean this is coming from people who I respected, I usually joke about people like that as being a little off balance or uneducated, such as flat-earthers and such.

/YOU KNOW HOW I SEE YOU WITH YOUR NEW PROG? I SEE A WHOLE LOT OF CONTEMPT IN YOUR DIRECTION SINCE YOU KNEW THE OPENED SOURCES OF RYBKA ANSD SO YOU SIMPLY RE INVENTED THAT MATERIAL AND CLAIM NOW THAT YOU HAVE INVENTED IT ALL BY YOURSELF AND THIS IS HOMNEST IN YOUR EYES NO; MAN THIS ISNT HONEST AT ALL THINGS GET MORE COMPLICATED IF I ADD LARRY TO THE WHOLE SETTING HE HAD RYBKA IN HIS HANDS AND NOW IS COOPERATING WITH YOU HAIL TO THAT/

I have yet to hear a coherent theory (let alone provable factual account) that makes any sense to me about how something like this would happen.

7BUT ITS SO SIMPLE BOB HAD THE CONCEPT OF PRIVATE LYNCH JUSTICE SO THAT ALL HONEST OTHERS MUST HAVE TOLD HIM TO STOP THAT ANDS TO EITHER PUT UP OR SHUT UP OR EITHER SUEING VAS OR GIV IT A REST BUT I SAW NO OTHER VOICE THAT OPPOSED BOB WITH HIS FATAL LYNCH OBSESSION WAIT I HAVE SOMEONE WHO CONTRADICTED HYATT AND THAT WAS CORBIT WHO THEN LEFT IN A HURRY AFTER BEINF KNOCKED DOWN WITH THE USUAL SPEECH THAT HE COULDNT COUNTER LIKE A GOOD POKER PLAYER/

It's especially odd when I was I saw the evidence and it was absolutely convincing to me. I know Ken Thompson and he is not a fool.

/DONT FORGET ALSO GENIUS COULD BE ABUSED WHICH IS THE CASE IN THE TWO EVENTS: KEN IS A TOO PEACEFUL OLD AGED GUY WITH A NICETY IN HIS CHARACTER THAT PREVENTS HIM TO TELL CERTAIN PEOPLE SOME BASIC TRUTHS: HERE HE IS SIMILAR TO VAS I WISH BOTH A LONG LASTING HAPPY LIFE/

Bob Hyatt is not a vindictive person, he takes enormous abuse without losing his cool and does not go after people that I have ever seen.

/BASICALLY I AGREE WITH YOU BUT EXCUSE ME IF I TELL YOU THAT HIS TEN THOUSANDS OF MESSAGES IN THE RYBKA FORUM SPEAK A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE BOB ALSO INSULTED AND REACTED IN ANGER BUT AGAIN I LIKE HIM FOR HIS FRIENDLINESS TO ALSO INFORM REAL OUTSIDERS LIKE ME WITHOUT HIM I WOULD HAVE GOT NOTHING SO CONTINUAL OVER THE YEARS BUT MAN HE ALSO INSULTED ME FOR BEING LOWER THAN A BACTERIUM AND HE ASKED WHY IN HELL MY PARENTS HAVENT ABORTED ME AFTER MY BIRTH!!!! SO PLEASE DONT INVENT FAIRY TALES ABOUT BOB HYATT/

I don't know Fabien at all so I cannot speak to why he would just go off the deep end and try to make claims that have absolutely no evidence whatsoever. He does not even compete and hasn't for a long time, is he known to also be of questionable character?

/THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I SUPPOSED ABOUT HIM SINCE HE SEEMS TOTaLLY UNABLE TO JUDGE HIS OWN STEPS AFTER HIS LONG ABSENCE HES CERTAINLY A SPECIAL TALENT TOO BUT PERHAPS I DONT KNOW ALL THE DETAILS OF THE COOPERATION BETWEEN HIM AND VAS SO WITHOUT SUCH DETAILS ITS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO JUDGE IN A FAQIR MANNER

SO LET ME FINISH THESE POINTSW WITH MY HONEST EXPECTATION THAT IT'S STILL POSSIBLE TO FIND AQ PEACEFUL MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MAIN FIGURES OF THE LONG DISSENT AND WITH A NICE EXPLANATION IN FORM OF A FRIENDLY REPORT FOR ALL THE SPECTATORS
WE LITTLE FANS IN OUR COMMUNITS SWHOULDNT BE LEFT ALONE WITH OUR DEPRESSION BECAUSE OF THE ACTUAL SPLIT AND I CALL EVERYABODYS WHO COULD INFLUENCE OTHER IMPORTANT FIGURES IN DIRECVTION OF PEACE

WITHOUT SUCH A SOLUTION WE WILL SEE A TOTAL COLLAPSE OF THE ACTUAL ICGA/

the Rybka supporters are asking a LOT to expect any reasonable person to go along with this (what seems to me) unbelievable conspiracy stuff.

/KOMODO ISNT A DREAM NO? IT WAS POSSIBLE BECAUSE CERTAIN PEOPLE RIPPED RYBKA AND PUBLISHED THE RESULT IN OPEN SOURCE CORRECT??

I CAN see of course one or two jealous people trying to go after someone but not an entire group of respected people who put their reputation on the line. I cannot imagine Ken Thompson, the Bell creator and world renown computer scientist and Unix creator being sucked up into a purposeful lie for example.

It wont take much time, so please let me quickly comment with big letters right into your text where I see clear untruth, let's see if I achieve to do that. Of course you with your sensational bright program wont believe me because I'm not a member of your panel. Please dont hate me just because I am trying to make the points of dissent as clearly as possible. Dont hate me, just say, he comes from abroad and is just an observer. Thanks.

[bob]

There is a lot of "convenience" in these "protests." Ed bailed out because Chris was not approved. That was HIS mistake, not ours. Miguel failed to participate. That was HIS mistake, not ours. This "I don't like the make-up, or the rules, or the process, or the wattage of the light bulbs, so I am not going to participate" is, quite simply, a cop-out...

One of the better things I did in my chess live.

Apparently not, based on your belated attempts to change history. Wouldn't it have been better to voice concerns DURING the investigation when it would have mattered? It is now a closed case. Discussion just wastes time.

[bob]

...
(1) First of all their mathematical foolishness.
If you have 300 programmers (amateurs and pros) and gather 34 in a special ICGA panel and then only 16 voted, then even the result of 16-0 isnt a clear result at all. Levy says if it had been 9-7 then the staff should have taken some serious considerations out of doubt.

However this is against all knowledge coming from stats.

So you are saying instead of assuming a pretty obvious result of 16-0, we have to assume that all the others that did not voted are most likely pro Vas?

No, exactly this wasnt what I meant. I just wanted to mention the until now unknown reasons for their abstination. Dont waste so much time in computerchess. Take the political elections. You know that non voters are usually counted for the negative votes from opposition?

This is completely irrelevant. The motivation of the non-voters do not matter. It is in politics the same thing. When people decide not to vote (and hence have no direct input in the voting), that's their problem and their problem alone.
In the whole Rybka-issue it is even much easier. If a programmer (or hundreds of them) were able to provide reasonable proof that no wrongdoing by Vas was involved, they could have approached the panel and could have presented their evidence, and may have voted. Nobody did (not even Vas himself!).

False!

For instance, I did not participate because I could not allow myself to be associated with a process in which 2/3 members of the secretariat should have recused themselves. This was mentioned but they won't listen.
The whole process was flawed from the beginning.

Miguel

No, not false.

The motivation is irrelevant for the outcome. The fact that the process was flawed (which is to be expected in such a small and minor 'club') is irrelevant and should not affect participation. If you don't vote you don't vote and this makes it even worse. This is how it works. If somebody is not satisfied with the process, he/she can or better should still vote with their best intention in mind. Not to vote is no solution in this case. Non-voting is inextricably connected to issues of moral responsibility, especially because fewer voters mean less valid statistics. The chess-community would have much more agreed with whatever the outcome of the ICGA voting by attending the flawed process and voting. Of course, it is your freedom to stay away from the case and do something else rather than doing something that you regard as useless.
In the end it was just a poll within a small subset of chesscomputer geeks. Nothing more. If Vas wants a flawless procedure he is free to sue.

Axel

There is a lot of "convenience" in these "protests." Ed bailed out because Chris was not approved. That was HIS mistake, not ours. Miguel failed to participate. That was HIS mistake, not ours. This "I don't like the make-up, or the rules, or the process, or the wattage of the light bulbs, so I am not going to participate" is, quite simply, a cop-out...

I cannot even believe you dare to tell me that it was my "mistake" not to participate. You are talking like I have a vested interest in this, I don't, so it was no mistake because I did not lose anything. It was an ethical decision, since I did not want to be associated with the process that considered unacceptable.

Miguel

It is YOUR mistake when (a) you had a chance to participate, but didn't, and then (b) whine about the make-up of the panel, the process, etc...

Sort of a "either play ball or get out of the gym. we don't need any more coaches, we need players..."

[bob]

[quote="Miguel"]
Not really.

It was beyond flawed. A member of the Secretariat has been notoriously and publicly biased from the get go. That is unacceptable. He was the same who has declared that "guts" are good to detect clones (in other accusations), the same member who has been leaking information in a process that is supposed to be confidential. Another member of the secretariat is not even a programmer and he is a member of a direct competitor team... To make things worse, at the very moment that rybka 1.6 was found to have Crafty in it, Bob should have recused himself on the spot. That is the same silliness as having Fabien in the secretariat, in charge of writing the report. In addition, the final report misrepresented who signed and who did not and was written... and was not even circulated for final approval. Was it? and do not get me started in how the report was written.

I bet most (if not all) of the members of the panel had good intentions, but the behavior of the ICGA was, at best, incompetent. Several rules that you may expect to have in a cheating investigation were violated.

The only thing I ask myself is... Why do I freaking care.

Miguel
[quote]


It seems that you are primarily addressing me, so how about getting a few things straight if you want to use my name or imply something about me...

1. I have NEVER said "guts are good to detect clones." Not one time. "gut feel" might be the thing that causes one to look, as in the similarities reported between early Rybka 1.0 beta versions and Fruit. But that does NOT "detect clones" and I have never said nor written such a thing. An outright lie.

2. I was not "notoriously biased from the get-go." Another OUTRIGHT LIE. You can find early posts by me on this subject dismissing it as very unlikely. Until Zach and Christophe began to show me evidence, until I looked at Fruit, and Strelka, and then the Rybka 1.0 beta binary. After looking at the evidence for quite a while, THEN I became convinced. So can you PLEASE get something right, at least every now and then, if you want to imply things about me?

Two outright lies in one post.

To continue, we didn't discover the Rybka 1.6.1 stuff until the investigation was nearly completed. It would be foolish to back out at that point. In a court case, there are PLENTY of biased people involved. Guarantee you the cops and the district attorneys believe the accused is guilty as sin. The defense attorneys believe he is innocent. Vas just refused to provide any defense. His mistake. Would it have made any different in the final conclusion? Almost certainly not. In the final punishment? Possibly. But district attorneys and police do not recuse themselves if they become convinced of the guilt of the accused. The judge/jury listen to what is presented and come up with a verdict and punishment. ICGA board did just that.

Several certainly assisted us in the final report. Mark Watkins for one. You were not asked since you didn't participate. Should we have sought you out? You have any idea how the final report WAS produced? The final report was developed right on the wiki...

[Rolf]

It seems that you [Bob is addressing Miguel] are primarily addressing me, so how about getting a few things straight if you want to use my name or imply something about me...

1. I have NEVER said "guts are good to detect clones." Not one time. "gut feel" might be the thing that causes one to look, as in the similarities reported between early Rybka 1.0 beta versions and Fruit. But that does NOT "detect clones" and I have never said nor written such a thing. An outright lie.

2. I was not "notoriously biased from the get-go." Another OUTRIGHT LIE. You can find early posts by me on this subject dismissing it as very unlikely. Until Zach and Christophe began to show me evidence, until I looked at Fruit, and Strelka, and then the Rybka 1.0 beta binary. After looking at the evidence for quite a while, THEN I became convinced. So can you PLEASE get something right, at least every now and then, if you want to imply things about me?

Two outright lies in one post.

To continue, we didn't discover the Rybka 1.6.1 stuff until the investigation was nearly completed. ..

Bob, arent you re-writing history if you completely left out that before anyone brought any bit of evidence to your eyes that Ch.Theron already had accused Vas in a horrible insult or destroying accusation by proclaiming, I quote the literal wording by heart, that he would be on the top with his Tiger too, if he hadnt this ethical problem that fdidnt allow him to do it? We have here a bias or prejudice before anyone could have started any investigation to condemn a newcomer with character assassination in the absence of legal justice.

Apparently there is nothing in the ICGA that would allow to seriously complain about a fellow member in the peer group but still with an ethically sober application of the law without any attempts of lynch justice.. The ICGA isnt officially registered anywhere still now, so that I tend to begin to understand you in what a legally unclear situation that had brought you in.
What could you have done to clarify? There was a clear need to make up a case that then would at least convince the direct competitors of Vas.

I see a scenario that you had to invent (I should begin to use the word criminalize) something as out of any tolerable dimensions only to prove a wrong in Vas programming when after the unrefuted statement of Dann Corbit almost all others now and in the past would also be guilty under that same accusation simply because there is almost nothing in a chess program (intended to play tournament chess or at least simulating it) that could be called original and a singularity of some sort besides some freaky name adoptions.

This is looking privately motivated and it lacks just the necessary legality that we expect if we dont want to fall back into lynch justice (NB that this term doesnt only mean burning and hanging etc. it means the lack of control in a fair judicial processing). However the absolute privately construed non-official staff of this ICGA doesnt imply any fair handling in case of complaints.

In the end I ask myself if the ICGA could be taken for serious at all if there is no way to officially pursue any violations of human rights against other members.

Ed like always seems to have seen something reveiling in the case of the tournament director himself who is a dutch by chance and the one who cared for the dissertation of Fritz Reul (see also the next events in a continuation of this message...)

[wgarvin]

Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?

Unsolved only in your mind. Any competent programmer who understands assembly and actually bothered to read through the evidence, will realize that Vas copied entire chunks of Crafty verbatim, and later copied and adapted to bitboards nearly the entire eval of Fruit 2.1 (one of the strongest open-source engines available at that time).

You seem to think the ICGA banned him for their own malicious conspiratorial reasons. The truth is much simpler: He cheated, he got caught, he lied about his program's originality, and he refused to engage with the ICGA in any meaningful way while the accusations were being investigated and potential responses were being weighed. Why should the ICGA let him

[wgarvin]

Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?

Unsolved only in your mind. Any competent programmer who understands assembly and actually bothered to read through the evidence, will realize that Vas copied entire chunks of Crafty verbatim, and later copied and adapted to bitboards nearly the entire eval of Fruit 2.1 (one of the strongest open-source engines available at that time).

You seem to think the ICGA banned him for their own malicious conspiratorial reasons. The truth is much simpler: He cheated, he got caught, he lied about his program's originality, and he refused to engage with the ICGA in any meaningful way while the accusations were being investigated and potential responses were being weighed. Why should the ICGA let his engines play in their tournaments, if he cheats and has no remorse about it?

[Rolf]

Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?

Unsolved only in your mind. Any competent programmer who understands assembly and actually bothered to read through the evidence, will realize that Vas copied entire chunks of Crafty verbatim, and later copied and adapted to bitboards nearly the entire eval of Fruit 2.1 (one of the strongest open-source engines available at that time).

You seem to think the ICGA banned him for their own malicious conspiratorial reasons. The truth is much simpler: He cheated, he got caught, he lied about his program's originality, and he refused to engage with the ICGA in any meaningful way while the accusations were being investigated and potential responses were being weighed. Why should the ICGA let him

I'm really astonished to read such objectively false statements. In truth Vas has never hidden that he has forefathers in his program. If you care please read all that in the bypack of some early Rybka. But would you be nice and explain to me what relevance this non-registered entity ICGA has for you? THe whole process against Vas is rigged and irrelevant. I cannot imagine why smart people should care at all? There is a wide field of politics.

[geots]

Whether or not Vasik used Fruit codes is unsolved. There are debates for, and there are debates against, so what's to believe.

I think it is too easy to say he used Fruit codes and leave it at that, because it is the easiest, more logical thing to do, and hereby condemn him beforehand.

Should we rely on ICGA's version who consists of Vas competitors who btw are commercial, or on Ed, Chris and others version who are studying the code and are trying to compare the differences and similarities between the two programs ?

Unsolved only in your mind. Any competent programmer who understands assembly and actually bothered to read through the evidence, will realize that Vas copied entire chunks of Crafty verbatim, and later copied and adapted to bitboards nearly the entire eval of Fruit 2.1 (one of the strongest open-source engines available at that time).

You seem to think the ICGA banned him for their own malicious conspiratorial reasons. The truth is much simpler: He cheated, he got caught, he lied about his program's originality, and he refused to engage with the ICGA in any meaningful way while the accusations were being investigated and potential responses were being weighed. Why should the ICGA let his engines play in their tournaments, if he cheats and has no remorse about it?

Posting your garbage one time wasnt enough?