Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

[bob]

<snipped>

That's not true, as Bob has repeatedly said. The chance that 800 lines of code will be the same from 2 different programmers, even when given the same assignment at the same time, is very very small.

Cheers,
Andy

I think that things are dependent on the assignment.
If the assignment contain 1000 small assignements that everyone of them is 10 lines then it is possible to have 800 lines that are the same without
copying.

Uri

Can we come back from never-never land and re-enter the real world? What is this junk about "if the assign contain 1000 small assignments" ??? Does your chess program look like that? Mine doesn't. No assignment I have ever given was a group of individual (small) assignments. I would give the individual assignments instead, one at a time.

This is like the mathematician that when asked, is your child a male or female, he answers "yes, of course." We need to remain in the higher probability area of the potential discussions, not go off into something where the probability is essentially one out of an infinite number of choices, which most would call "zero".

[Terry McCracken]

<snipped>

That's not true, as Bob has repeatedly said. The chance that 800 lines of code will be the same from 2 different programmers, even when given the same assignment at the same time, is very very small.

Cheers,
Andy

I think that things are dependent on the assignment.
If the assignment contain 1000 small assignements that everyone of them is 10 lines then it is possible to have 800 lines that are the same without
copying.

Uri

This has nothing to do with the current case and you know it. Your quibble can only confuse people who are not familiar with the field of programming.

I'm really starting to believe that all you want is to divert the attention from the real topic.



// Christophe

Both Uri and Rolf, Rolf even more so have made a complete mess of this thread.

It's very frustrating to come into this forum half a day later and wade through 50 useless postings just to see anything of importance.

Terry

[Rolf]

You are assuming too much. For example, would you file suit against someone that was making a claim that hurt you, if you_knew_ that the claim was true? Because to file the suit, you have to make a sworn statement that the claim is false in order to seek damages. And if the claim is later proven true, you just committed perjury and are now looking at prison time rather than seeking financial redress from someone else. The sword of justice cuts both ways so caution is required.

I could cut out the other stuff because this here already shows your bias. You simply argue always from the position that Vas has done something wrong. I already wrote a message to write my astonishment how experts could be biased. If you at least would find arguments in favor of Vas, just out of principle. Or also in case you knew how something might have no legal relevance.

Has Vas responded in any way about this? How can one find points in his favor if there is nothing but a deafening silence from his side of the table???

I think he can rely on a purely psychological standpoint for the moment. When did you talk to a commercial programmer collegue during the last 50 years? Now that's going too far. You are looking upon everything like the guy with a hammer. Everything looks to him like a nail while hidden nails frighten him. A commercial programmer cannot discuss what he does, Bob, he lets his program speak. He's in chess what you are on ICC in Bullet. Simply the best!

Sorry, but that boat won't float. When I was accused of cheating several years ago, about something that happened back in 1986. I chose to not sit idly by and let the accusations reverberate around r.g.c.c... I replied factually, quoted a specific letter from David Levy which described the investigation he did and the conclusion that absolutely nothing wrong was done, and so forth. It would be easy enough to simply post "Rybka is my own unique work, I didn't borrow any code form any GPL or open-source programs, so I don't know why this kind of discussion has come up." I can think of only one reason why _I_ would not write that were the discussion about me, I'll leave discovering that reason as an exercise for the reader. I think it is obvious enough that anyone will "get it."

Well, didnt we two discuss more than once the differences between mere lynching justice without fair court trials and a justice after the Roman system? Innocent until proven guilty but NOT guilty until having defended oneself against all kind of campaign like CT&BobH allegations.

What "allegations" have I made? My participation started when someone asked "why would one obfuscate node counts, depths, and PV output?" My response was not any sort of allegation, it was a simple and direct explanation of why that might be done. Then another alternative was provided by CT and it does carry some weight.

It also strikes me that you sit in a boat with people who admittedly have cheated with clones and or output but you cant leave someone innocent his innocense until he was proven guilty.

I can't parse that and have no idea what you mean.

Your newest law of Friday morning is that someone is guilty until he has not asked David Levy ('Satisfying sex with robots', Dissert. Maastricht 2007!) and for all didnt declare that he has never slapped his, sorry, stolen Fruit code nor from Crafty.

I said nothing of the kind. When Berliner first made his claim, David quickly followed up on it. We did not play at the 1986 ACM event because we had just played in the 1986 WCCC and won it. But Harry went because he wanted to attend the conference. David asked him to have Cray restore the same program we used a month or two earlier at the WCCC, and play over some disputed moves in that game. We had already provided the log file showing all analysis, and David/Harry replayed the game to verify that the analysis matched the log, and the actual game. David then wrote a lengthy letter explaining how he evaluated each claim by Berliner, and dismissed each one in succession in several ways, from the replay mentioned above, to "here are other programs that play the same move that you said _no_ computer would play."

As the president of the ICCA, he had an obligation to maintain the integrity of the ICCA, and he investigated thoroughly. I mentioned him, not because of who he was, but because he did a careful analysis of each claim in turn and verified that they were _all_ 100% unfounded. If someone else had done that rather than David, I would have cited their findings instead.

Again, although you attack the actually best programmer worldwide except Alabama as already guilty because he doesnt speak you buddy with the Tiger author who was indirectly accused of having obfuscated the output of his Tiger versions 12, 13, 14. At least he never answered the decent questions of former cooperator Jeroen Noomen. But this is no problem for you. Although CT has obviously cheated his users you still support CT and attack Vas. Furthermore you buddy with someone who was caught red-handed with a clone what he denied for a long time until he confessed his guilt. So you buddy with such famous programmers but you hate to grant Vas the same innocense. Vas is already guilty for you with unknown reasons.

Please reconsider all that, Bob.

I don't see anything to reconsider. He offered to explain how his search worked, and how his node count was somewhat different as a result. I've already posed several "options" for counting nodes. But you notice that the "other side" (your words) never offers any answers. Only counter-claims and counter-questions. Which do nothing to help resolve the questions being asked.

Bob, in a climate of lynch justice with the particular persons involved (I'm not allowed to mention what I mean because it would be deleted, but I wonder why you are cooperating with them; if you like we can have a short exchange per PN about that topic, are you game?) you cant expect, that you, because there is no doubt that you are sober, I know that, that you get any reaction from Vas. Anyway you are doing a good job because in China soon the ICGA will repeat your questions. If I were Vas I wouldnt participate under ICGA anymore. As Enrique wrote the ICGA is important not the CCC.

I repeat my standpoint. Since you dont ask the other commercial programmers where they took their stuff from, you have no right to ask Vas. Or it looks biased. And above all if Vas doesnt answer you cant continue a campaign like repetition of always the same stuff. All IMO.

[Rolf]

Well, didnt we two discuss more than once the differences between mere lynching justice without fair court trials and a justice after the Roman system? Innocent until proven guilty but NOT guilty until having defended oneself against all kind of campaign like CT&BobH allegations.

What "allegations" have I made? My participation started when someone asked "why would one obfuscate node counts, depths, and PV output?" My response was not any sort of allegation, it was a simple and direct explanation of why that might be done. Then another alternative was provided by CT and it does carry some weight.

It also strikes me that you sit in a boat with people who admittedly have cheated with clones and or output but you cant leave someone innocent his innocense until he was proven guilty.

I can't parse that and have no idea what you mean.

Bob, I already begged you for a short exchange in PN because to mention what I mean is being deleted here. Although I'm just quoting facts. Are you game?

[trojanfoe]

I repeat my standpoint. Since you dont ask the other commercial programmers where they took their stuff from, you have no right to ask Vas. Or it looks biased. And above all if Vas doesnt answer you cant continue a campaign like repetition of always the same stuff. All IMO.

There is nothing biased about it - the investigations start indepedently based on suspiscion. If a person makes a claim in this forum, for example, there are enough people with programming experience to quickly shoot down any unfair claims. That hasn't happened in this thread as all the pro-Rybka participants are able to do is complain that the investigation is invalid and based on personal jealously. None of the pro-Rybka folk have successfully countered any of the technical details presented. It's almost political in nature in fact.

Cheers,
Andy

[Rolf]

I repeat my standpoint. Since you dont ask the other commercial programmers where they took their stuff from, you have no right to ask Vas. Or it looks biased. And above all if Vas doesnt answer you cant continue a campaign like repetition of always the same stuff. All IMO.

There is nothing biased about it - the investigations start indepedently based on suspiscion. If a person makes a claim in this forum, for example, there are enough people with programming experience to quickly shoot down any unfair claims. That hasn't happened in this thread as all the pro-Rybka participants are able to do is complain that the investigation is invalid and based on personal jealously. None of the pro-Rybka folk have successfully countered any of the technical details presented. It's almost political in nature in fact.

Cheers,
Andy

Andy, you cant seriously mean it. Apart from me and partially Uri there is nobody here in defense of Rybka. Didnt you see this? If you would change into Rybka forum you would see many people who think different. But why should they argue in this climate. The reason for me to make some arguments is NOT that I know for sure what is going on but when the anti-Vas side is making shallow messages. Of course I cant judge on the quoted code at all. But I have experience how people are doing a witch-hunt. This is actually what is happening here. Of course the triumph will be China. Otherwise these people here cant hurt Vas and Rybka.

Since you are a new name for me, just for me, and I still take you on a high level and ethical grounds would you please comment on what Corbit has reported here, namely that as he showed the analyses to Fabien, he reacted so, that he didnt care. And although some have explained that this meant that others couldt neither do something. But we still have the campaign here. Could you explain to a lay what tghis is all about? Some wrote "envie" but why?

And then we have a strange situation that the main attackers have themselves a special standing. I wait on a short exchange wih Bob and then I will decide how to handle that topic.

If you could help with some thoughtful reflections then it would be positive for the community. You know I can only oppose as a democrat and humanistic guy all kind of doctored annihilation of other peple and the products of their talents.

My fantasy often tells me that Vas will retaliate at his chosen moment and then people should not be surprised if they are taken to task. In case they are Europeans like CT. I fully agree with what Graham has written.

[Uri Blass]

Uri,

who are you defending ? Vasik or yourself ?

Tony

Apparently Vas isn't under attack here, so why would he need defending?

Sorry, should have been Rybka or Movei

Tony

If I wanted to defend Movei I could say nothing in the first place because movei was not under direct attack.

I simply things that what you do is unfair and Rybka may be more original than part of the commercial programs.

I think that by justice Rybka should not be considered as derivative inspite of the similiarity when toga is clearly a derivative.

If we talk about the law I think that it is unclear otherwise you can make the court to do something against Vas.

Uri

I can't believe for one second that you do not understand the problem.

Toga is more similar to Fruit 2.1 than Rybka 1.0, most probably. But Toga has been released under the GPL, which is perfectly in line with the desire of the author of Fruit.

Rybka 1.0 is maybe a derivative of Fruit 2.1 (this point is still under analysis) and if it is the case then it is an illegal derived work because it does not respect the licence intended by the author of the original work.

Nobody has pointed a gun at Rybka's author forcing him to use GPL code in his program. It's very clear what you are not allowed to do with GPL code: if you want to release a program under a proprietary licence, then just don't use GPL code. No excuse.

Nobody will ever believe either that the author of Rybka was not able to write his own program from scratch without using GPL code. No excuse.

If you think that parts of commercial programs are illegal, then please tell us which programs and provide evidence or at least some pointers so that others can help you prove your point.

But at this time there is only one fish trapped in the net.



// Christophe

1)I think that loop list may be a derivative of fruit.

The only evidence that I have is the correlation table from the ccrl
that shows higher correlation between fruit and list relative to other pair of programs.
I do not know know about people who tried to reverse engineer loop list
and report their results.

I remember that Fritz made a significant improvement at the fruit time from Fritz8 to Fritz9 so I suggest to check Fritz9 and later Fritz versions.

I think that doing "drug test" only to rybka is simply unfair.

2)I also think that all the rules about GPL are unfair if rybka can be considered to be a derivative of fruit based on code that is not relevant to geneate moves like input_available() and they were part of the functions that were used as evidence.

This is my opinion and fair is simply opinion about justice and not about the law.

Not everything that the law say have to be morally right

Uri

[chrisw]

Uri,

who are you defending ? Vasik or yourself ?

Tony

Apparently Vas isn't under attack here, so why would he need defending?

Vas isnt under attack, only the origin of his program is.

That's the excuse constantly being used - yes.
His integrity and honesty are under attack through the insinuations being made.

Graham,

How do you propose moderation deals with this different to the way it is doing?

You were noderator last time, please inform us which posts you would have deleted out of this thread .......

Boy - that's the million dollar question!
The problem with CCC is that there's this thing called the charter which unfortunately severely inhibits this sort of discussion.

I would have thought that questioning the legality of an engine falls under the guise of a legally questionable post.

Also, by questioning the legality of an engine in such a manner, one is attacking the honesty and integrity of the engine author, so you're on the fringe with regards to the charter that prohibits personal or libellous attacks.

Unfortunately, if you enforce the charter, such discussions would therefore not be allowed. I'm not saying whether that's a good or bad thing, but that's the fact of the matter.

Hope that explains the predicament that faces the moderators in such situations.

The reason I didn't stand again was so that I no longer had to make such decisions, so I have to leave that to the current team.
Be warned though that you'll cop abuse no matter what you do, although I know that you're already aware of this.

Cheers, Graham.

PS - I think that your post on clones at the top of the page makes the position of the moderators clear.

Questionning the legality of an engine has been done several times in the recent past of CCC. How many times has it happened? 10 times? More?

I have never seen anybody standing up and saying it was against the charter.

Thanks to the discussions, a number of clones or illegal derived works have been discovered.

CCC is the place for these discussions to happen. The moderators' job is to let them happen, but under reasonable control.

// Christophe

Tres drole Christophe

What is exactly "under reasonable control"?

I was under the impression mods were trying to "reasonably control" the discussion, but I am rapidly coming to the conclusion this is not actually a moderatable discussion.

One man's "reasonable control" is another's "fascist dicatorship" and yet another's "anarchic disorder". When the petty gripes of those who feel their toes have been stepped on overspill into my private domain with threats pouring into my private email address (54 threatening and demanding and complaining emails from one person for example), I would say that moderation of the forums itself is under attack.

[swami]

I think that the discussions to this point would pose no problem for me as a moderator, I would leave them untouched. Perhaps here and there someone might get a bit insulting, although I don't recall such. But "the quest for truth" ought to outweigh "the fear of false accusations". Yes, blatant false claims need to be dealt with. But there is quite a bit of evidence here that should be discussed since more is being presented each day.

I was not particularly interested, and still am not, other than to correct some false information about detecting copied code. Faculty members deal with this on a regular basis and the issues are not exactly new.

Either new information will continue to come from the discussion, or it will die of its own accord...

Thanks for your opinion, Bob. very much appreciated.

Looks like we are in complete agreement on this. So I guess Chrisw's sticky notice "Discussion is fine, libel not" worked very well and many people have shown restraint and have kept their posts under control.

[bob]

I find it funny to follow this discussion with Uri, it's like running around in circles. Or running against a wall?

Some mentioned the silence of Vas about this matter. But he is not the only one who is silent, I also didn't read any word about this matter from the other side. I would like to hear what Fabiens take is on this?
I know that he doesn't post here, but did anybody bring this matter to his attention by email and ask about his view?

Sometimes it is more akin to having a discussion (I am English-speaking, obviously) with someone whose native language is (say) Russian, And they were taught to speak English by a Russian that has never communicated in English. So they can speak the words, but they often don't make any sense the way they are put together. At times his posts are clear and concise, and he has helped me here and there (such as in choosing N starting positions for the recent testing thread). And at times his posts don't make any sense at all given the previous context...