FIDE Ethics Commission ruling on ICGA/Rybka complaint

[Terry McCracken]

Do I understand correctly that you accuse Marco/Joona/Tord of having stolen code in Stockfish?

Here we Go..Again! *Sigh*

This of course is for Ed as I'm with you on this, Dr. Muller.

[Adam Hair]

That two chess programs from the same author cannot be entered in the chess competition. It is not explicit.

OK. But a registration form that is used for both the WCCC and the Olympiad cannot really be used as evidence that this is possible. One would really have to look up the WCCC rules. I know the ICGA board thinks it is not allowed, from private e-mail correspondence. Presumably they have some basis for this.

In my estimation, nothing in the 2015 WCCC rules forbids multiple entries by the same author(s) as long as game-playing code and data common to the entries are documented on the entry form. Since the acceptance or rejection of entries is a power reserved for the ICGA President, it is possible that multiple entries would be denied. But there is no explicit mention of this sort of situation in the current rules.

[michiguel]

Do I understand correctly that you accuse Marco/Joona/Tord of having stolen code in Stockfish?

The criteria to be used is "Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA"

Miguel

[hgm]

Even worse, their own names would be smeared.

That it would be unjust is beyond dispute, whatever the license. Pretending toward the public that Marco/Joona/Tord participate in an ICGA tournament, which would be the result of letting Stockfish compete unless it is made absolutely clear that SF's participation is unauthorised, would violate their personality rights. They get to choose in which events they participate, not the ICGA and not anyone else. They don't get to choose what other people do with SF, but this is not about SF but about their own rights.

You seem to create the most unrealistic straw mans, which border on total paranoia. No one would pretend anything, of course. Why do you consider it even a problem to make absolutely clear who would be shamed in case of wrong-doing? If you would have entered Stockfish in violation of ICGA rules, (e.g. by lying about what code you contributed), it would of course be you that was disqualified, and Tord/Joona/Marco would only be named as the wronged party. What you say is as silly as claiming that the Rybka affair has smeared the name of Fruit and Fabian.

The whole assumption that participation of Stockfish would lead to its disqualification is utterly strange, like Tord/Marco/Joona are some kind of criminals that must be protected from exposure.

[hgm]

The criteria to be used is "Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA"

So you are afraid that it can be proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA that there is stolen code if in fact there is none, and the source code is openly available to anyone? You do realize that this sounds like a rather extreme case of paranoia?

[Adam Hair]

However, despite my keen interest in it happening, I suspect that the title of Greatest Lover in the World will never be forced on me.

So, it is equally meaningless to attribute - or even desire - titles where it will never happen as well.

The nice thing of titles is that everyone can make them up.

The official ICGA World Champion Computer Chess
The offical <insert> Greatest Lover in the World

Just need to find one organisation or person willing to award you the title.

If Roger wishes to be innovative I am sure this could be arranged by the ICGA in Leiden. Dr. Levy has written a book called "Sex with Robots."

Harvey Williamson!!



Later.

It is time that the automata of the world learn about the "Caribbean Don Juan"

[Graham Banks]

However, despite my keen interest in it happening, I suspect that the title of Greatest Lover in the World will never be forced on me.

So, it is equally meaningless to attribute - or even desire - titles where it will never happen as well.

The nice thing of titles is that everyone can make them up.

The official ICGA World Champion Computer Chess
The offical <insert> Greatest Lover in the World

Just need to find one organisation or person willing to award you the title.

If Roger wishes to be innovative I am sure this could be arranged by the ICGA in Leiden. Dr. Levy has written a book called "Sex with Robots."

Harvey Williamson!!



Later.

It is time that the automata of the world learn about the "Caribbean Don Juan"

Anybody putting their pecker in a prototype might be putting their manhood at risk.

[syzygy]

Even worse, their own names would be smeared.

That it would be unjust is beyond dispute, whatever the license. Pretending toward the public that Marco/Joona/Tord participate in an ICGA tournament, which would be the result of letting Stockfish compete unless it is made absolutely clear that SF's participation is unauthorised, would violate their personality rights. They get to choose in which events they participate, not the ICGA and not anyone else. They don't get to choose what other people do with SF, but this is not about SF but about their own rights.

You seem to create the most unrealistic straw mans, which border on total paranoia. No one would pretend anything, of course.

ICGA events are for programmers, or as others have put it "author-based". By default, Stockfish competing in one would signal that Marco/Joona/Tord are competing. As I explained, that would violate their personal rights.

Anyway, why am I repeating the obvious to someone who prefers to "outrage people "

[syzygy]

Only if the rules are clear upfront. ICGA kind of has a habit of changing the rules midgame (or rather, 6 years after the fact). If a programmer signs up for a tournament that is open to programmers, he may well feel pretty annoyed if the ICGA deviates from its own rules by entering any "missing" programs.

WHERE did the ICGA "change the rules 6 years after the fact?" Rule 2 has been around for as long as I can remember. 20 years prior to the Rybka case at least...

Apart from the sanctioning rules, I was thinking of the interpretation of Rule 2 as applied to Rybka. For example (link):

About a year ago, Chris Whittington (and maybe Alan Sassler) were arguing similarly regarding the standard in Rule #2. As it was becoming clear that "plagiarism" was going to the the interpretation (rather than copyright), they argued that surely a commercial programmer like VR should be judged by something closer to a copyright standard than some miasmic ivory-tower invention of the ICGA.

So in 2011 "it was becoming clear" that Rule 2 was going to be interpreted as imposing a stricter standard of originality than copyright.

Rajlich was supposed to know this in 2006?

I agree that 2011 was only 5 years after the fact, my bad.

[Rebel]

Do I understand correctly that you accuse Marco/Joona/Tord of having stolen code in Stockfish?

Eh, no.

But I still have the feeling you understood the point I was trying to make.