a) is an original work
b) is a derivative from xxxxx
I hereby solemnly promise:
1. Not to copy the work of other programmers without their express permission.
2. Not to RE the work of other programmers without their express permission.
3. When I use an idea I will mention the source in the README file.
Signature
----------------
Maintain a web-page of those who signed. I offer my space and time.
Ed why not create an organization instead, build a constitution and by-laws, with computer chess programmers' code of ethics.
Because:
- it takes time and money and a lot more involvement
- there is yet such an organization. It just need a bit of clean up.
- Kasparov tried and failed (hence my joke name for such a new association: PCCA).
Start small not big. Focus on code of ethics, avoid activities that involve money if not minimize. Time should not be a problem this is not a contest of who finish first.
Starting small and progressing, although being my own philosophy, contradicts modern trend promoted by the ICGA's opponents: build upon giants' shoulders So creating a new association would contradict their own philosophy. Besides, if each generation had to destroy everything the previous ones built think about what we'd get: 15 different world soccer federations, 5 UNO and so on.
No, that's not how adults deal with problems: they fight to correct what exists. For instance, it is clear now that David Levy doesn't have the confidence of a big part of the community. Maybe 1) time for him to step out, or 2) time for his opponents to organize themselves and chose someone to run against him during the next ICGA's elections?
Don't need to destroy the existing one.
ICGA this is big, a games association. The thought is only for chess.
a) is an original work
b) is a derivative from xxxxx
I hereby solemnly promise:
1. Not to copy the work of other programmers without their express permission.
2. Not to RE the work of other programmers without their express permission.
3. When I use an idea I will mention the source in the README file.
Signature
----------------
Maintain a web-page of those who signed. I offer my space and time.
Ed why not create an organization instead, build a constitution and by-laws, with computer chess programmers' code of ethics.
I would love to. Problem: I am a programmer with no organizing qualities nor a minimum talent to develop that.
The start is something like this.
1. Who are interested? 6 or more go ahead.
2. The initial members will draft the CBL and COE, discuss, debate, brainstorm, revise and approve.
3. Select officers
Basically that's it.
Then tournaments for members build upon trust. No more confusing rules required.
rbarreira wrote:I don't see the point. Any developer is innocent until proven guilty, so what exactly does one gain by signing some arbitrary code?
Renew out internal vows with out beloved hobby. Verbalize our sentiments to remember our own standards. Self control encouraged by peer pressure could be very powerful.
I think this is a bit redundant for open-source engines.
Mine has documentation in the code, the license file, and in a detailed technical document (programr.txt) distributed with the source, detailing what is used/inspired from where. Even Zobrist is acknowledged.
jdart wrote:I think this is a bit redundant for open-source engines.
It is redundant for you, but not for many others.
Miguel
Mine has documentation in the code, the license file, and in a detailed technical document (programr.txt) distributed with the source, detailing what is used/inspired from where. Even Zobrist is acknowledged.
rbarreira wrote:I don't see the point. Any developer is innocent until proven guilty, so what exactly does one gain by signing some arbitrary code?
Renew out internal vows with out beloved hobby. Verbalize our sentiments to remember our own standards. Self control encouraged by peer pressure could be very powerful.
Miguel
In that case I would respect more someone who does not sign the code than someone who does (note: in the absence of any other knowledge about the individual). If one needs vows, peer pressure and to sign something in order to behave...
So creating a new association would contradict their own philosophy. Besides, if each generation had to destroy everything the previous ones built think about what we'd get: 15 different world soccer federations, 5 UNO and so on.
