Previous World Champion Engine Authors Speak Out...

[Albert Silver]

I don't have a gripe with his analysis or conclusions, just that as the basis of an official accusation, it will warrant deeper scrutiny simply because he is not a well-established authority in the field. It is a fact that is all.

I have a gripe with posting anonymously in general, especially if the content goes so deep as to question or confirm a program's legitimacy. I am a firm believer in taking responsibility for one's words, which anonymity dispenses with. (No offense BB)

I would suggest you hang on to your hat, and keep your seatbelt securely fastened. There is more to this story than has been revealed to date. It will be exposed on the ICGA WIKI however. And it really does paint an ugly picture that I did not expect.

ICGA Wiki???

[Albert Silver]

Of course....but then, without ANY kind of fundamental non engine woud exist, any about nothing. You always make use of some previous ground to do anything, isnt it?

F

Fern, you should be flattered. He is saying your works are worthy of being accused of plagiarizing Shakespeare!

You're out of your element here. Surely you meant to say Cervantes. But you can't improve upon Cervantes (nor Shakespeare).

Not really. I read Cervantes (and Borges BTW), but Billy is still Billy, and even the South Americans concur. They will argue about the best Spanish language writer (or Portuguese), but not that Shakespeare is best, removing the language dispute. It is rather remarkable that a single author, one of the earliest in Modern English, is still so far above in terms of overall quality and sheer volume. Still, building on him is not just about writing nice things, but also establishing techniques and devices, just as Moliere is the father of comedy.

[bob]

Isn't, this letter, somewhat late? It looks like -to me-as if we were reading a letter written by Erasmo of Rotterdam about the sins of the papacy.
Besides, isn't Rybka 4 very far from rybka beta 1 and so very very far of Fruit?
If any familiarity is enough to talk of cloning or plagiarism, my God, there is scarce a thing in this Earth free of that.

I do not like the odour that exhales this letter...

fern

If Rybka 1 is heavily derivative of Fruit 2.1 and Rybka 4 is descended from Rybka 1, then Rybka 4 is still a descendant of a derivative work of Fruit 2.1.

Pretty simple, old man.

Fern is correct. It is possible for C to be derivative of B and B of A, but C is not a derivative of A.

Example
Lets say a program has 5 parts for simplicity of argument. So, A = a1+a2+a3+a4+a5. Now, B = b1+a2+a3+a4+b5, thus B is based on A or parts of A. Now, C = b1 + c2+c3+c4 + b5 and c2!=a2, c3!=a3, c4!=a4, thus C is based on B but has nothing in common with A.

Note: != means not equal

"possible" != "probable"

This issue will resolve itself. The ruckus is all about deciding whether to ask for Rybka source code in order to compete. Once this is done, the panel will see the code for the program that will compete, NOT Rybka 1. It is my opinion they will be extremely different (its not as if this is sneaking up on Vas, even if there was inappropriate stuff in there as recent as a year ago, it seems likely he has rewritten things by now). So the net result of all the sound and fury is that a couple people will finally fulfill their dream of getting to see the Rybka source.

I am not saying that just because the latest version of Rybka cluster source likely shares no code with Fruit everything is ok-dokay ethically, legally, or whatever...just that the process invoked by this letter will be unlikely to resolve anything other than forcing a commercial to choose between letting a few folks gawk at their code and not competing.

-Sam

Personally, I am betting on the latter in this case. Unfortunately. However, there is still the question of R3 and the title(s) it won. It is going to have to be examined (binary code) as well, most likely, since I have a strong suspicion that source code won't be shown...

However, there is still more to this story than is known publicly, but the WIKI will play it all out for everyone to see.

[yanquis1972]

Of course....but then, without ANY kind of fundamental non engine woud exist, any about nothing. You always make use of some previous ground to do anything, isnt it?

F

Fern, you should be flattered. He is saying your works are worthy of being accused of plagiarizing Shakespeare!

You're out of your element here. Surely you meant to say Cervantes. But you can't improve upon Cervantes (nor Shakespeare).

Not really. I read Cervantes (and Borges BTW), but Billy is still Billy, and even the South Americans concur. They will argue about the best Spanish language writer (or Portuguese), but not that Shakespeare is best, removing the language dispute. It is rather remarkable that a single author, one of the earliest in Modern English, is still so far above in terms of overall quality and sheer volume. Still, building on him is not just about writing nice things, but also establishing techniques and devices, just as Moliere is the father of comedy.

\

i love the name billy shakes (from a baseball announcer i hate -- tim mccarver). he is truly amazing. i have his complete works and should revisit them. and no cervantes or borges don't compare (tho i guess the language barrier is worth noting, but those guys have been wildly translated).

[bob]

And Sign The OPEN letter to the ICGA President

http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4038

excluding the Engine Author under examination .. we have all but one World Champion engine author since 1992 signing the letter
it should be remembered that these men were fierce competitors for many years ..so seeing them all agree to the notion that Rybka is an unauthorized Fruit derivative is quite astonishing and remarkable

Of course many other highly respected and talented Engine authors also signed the letter..some of whom might have been World Champions themselves if not losing to the engine in question or deciding not to even compete entirely in the ICGA World Championships given the participation of the allegedly illegally derived engine

Bob Hyatt ..a World Champion author himself of course did not sign as he is on the panel invested with making a determination on the derivative issue

i think this is unprecedented in the history of competitive sport Regards
Steve

Bob Hyatt ..a World Champion author himself of course did not sign as he is on the panel invested with making a determination on the derivative issue


I cant believe you state this in passing, because I cant believe you dont see anything wrong with him being on this panel. He has stated he knows Vas is guilty, and even if he is found innocent he is guilty. And you dont call this lynch mob mentality. How would you like to be the one Bob is making a decision about? This whole deal is about as slimy as computer chess can get.

I have clearly said that based on what I have seen with my own eyes, there is no doubt copying has occurred. It is _possible_ that Vas might somehow explain the identical parts of the code satisfactorily. I can't imagine what that might be, but it is possible.

My responsibility here is going to be to let the "prosecution" show the existing evidence everyone has seen, plus some other very significant evidence hardly anyone has seen, and then let Vas respond, if he chooses to. He can take the evidence point by point and explain why he believes it does not represent a problem of plagiarism or GPL violation. Then the "prosecution" will get to respond to his comments. And we will repeat this until nothing new is being shown. At that point, we will write a report giving the evidence and counter-evidence and send this to the ICGA. What they might do with it is unknown. It could involve stripping titles won with improper code, it could involve a "bad boy, don't do it again", or it could result in nothing at all.

We are not the jury. The three of us are a 3-judge panel to make sure that the discussions stay on topic, no flame wars, no personal conflicts. Just show the evidence and address it as needed until nothing more can be added...

There's no lynching. But I will bet you that once you see _everything_ you will change your opinion about what has happened. At least if you are willing to look at the evidence for yourself. There is a lot to be told here. Including a few shocks along the way...

[bob]

And Sign The OPEN letter to the ICGA President

http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4038

excluding the Engine Author under examination .. we have all but one World Champion engine author since 1992 signing the letter
it should be remembered that these men were fierce competitors for many years ..so seeing them all agree to the notion that Rybka is an unauthorized Fruit derivative is quite astonishing and remarkable

Of course many other highly respected and talented Engine authors also signed the letter..some of whom might have been World Champions themselves if not losing to the engine in question or deciding not to even compete entirely in the ICGA World Championships given the participation of the allegedly illegally derived engine

Bob Hyatt ..a World Champion author himself of course did not sign as he is on the panel invested with making a determination on the derivative issue

i think this is unprecedented in the history of competitive sport Regards
Steve

Bob Hyatt ..a World Champion author himself of course did not sign as he is on the panel invested with making a determination on the derivative issue


I cant believe you state this in passing, because I cant believe you dont see anything wrong with him being on this panel. He has stated he knows Vas is guilty, and even if he is found innocent he is guilty. And you dont call this lynch mob mentality. How would you like to be the one Bob is making a decision about? This whole deal is about as slimy as computer chess can get.

No George, Hyatt is a world class expert and has nothing to gain personally. It's not Dr. Hyatt who lacks scruples but Vas does. So why shouldn't be on the panel? He knows his line of work backwards, he's one of the best. Vas was caught plain and simple. It's time to accept that and move on.

I imagine you would love to have someone on your jury who already thought you were guilty before the trial started and nothing would change their mind. Can Hyatt be impartial? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

Only problem is, I am not on the "jury". I have just been asked to serve with two others and try to keep the investigation centered on the topic, leaving out all the other things, such as your comments in this thread which have nothing to do with evidence of any kind, just a personal opinion that doesn't help the discussion at all...

[bob]

I agree that Hyatt being in the committee seems wrong.

Hyatt to me is one of the main accusers, he has systematically gathered, structured and argued for the evidence that Rybka is a Fruit clone.

People who have such direct involvement (on any side) cannot be considered "impartial judges".

The best would be if they have some scientists/authors from related fields, like go/checkers/whatever who can fully comprehend the evidence presented but do not have any previous involvement in the issue, whatsoever.

This is what has been wrong with this process from the beginning. You are assuming facts not in evidence. I am not a judge. I will not decide innocence or guilt. I will not hand down a sentence. I am simply supposed to keep the investigation on the topic of "Did Vas copy parts of Fruit (or other programs) verbatim?" We are starting with Rybka 1 beta, but that is not the only version that will be addressed. We may go back to earlier versions, or to later versions (thru Rybka 4) since all have competed.

The panel that will do this is quite large and consists of a large number of programmers. The three "secretariat" members are simply there to try to keep the discussion limited to the specific topic of the investigation, and prevent all the other noise that always shows up here on CCC from obfuscating the technical merits of the arguments being made.

But nobody is paying attention to the document David sent out describing our function. They are making up their own incorrect assumptions and then complaining that those are not fair. However, they are also not real.

[bob]

I don't have a gripe with his analysis or conclusions, just that as the basis of an official accusation, it will warrant deeper scrutiny simply because he is not a well-established authority in the field. It is a fact that is all.

I have a gripe with posting anonymously in general, especially if the content goes so deep as to question or confirm a program's legitimacy. I am a firm believer in taking responsibility for one's words, which anonymity dispenses with. (No offense BB)

I would suggest you hang on to your hat, and keep your seatbelt securely fastened. There is more to this story than has been revealed to date. It will be exposed on the ICGA WIKI however. And it really does paint an ugly picture that I did not expect.

ICGA Wiki???

There is a WIKI page set up where this discussion is happening, organized under the ICGA...

[Terry McCracken]

And Sign The OPEN letter to the ICGA President

http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4038

excluding the Engine Author under examination .. we have all but one World Champion engine author since 1992 signing the letter
it should be remembered that these men were fierce competitors for many years ..so seeing them all agree to the notion that Rybka is an unauthorized Fruit derivative is quite astonishing and remarkable

Of course many other highly respected and talented Engine authors also signed the letter..some of whom might have been World Champions themselves if not losing to the engine in question or deciding not to even compete entirely in the ICGA World Championships given the participation of the allegedly illegally derived engine

Bob Hyatt ..a World Champion author himself of course did not sign as he is on the panel invested with making a determination on the derivative issue

i think this is unprecedented in the history of competitive sport Regards
Steve

Bob Hyatt ..a World Champion author himself of course did not sign as he is on the panel invested with making a determination on the derivative issue


I cant believe you state this in passing, because I cant believe you dont see anything wrong with him being on this panel. He has stated he knows Vas is guilty, and even if he is found innocent he is guilty. And you dont call this lynch mob mentality. How would you like to be the one Bob is making a decision about? This whole deal is about as slimy as computer chess can get.

No George, Hyatt is a world class expert and has nothing to gain personally. It's not Dr. Hyatt who lacks scruples but Vas does. So why shouldn't be on the panel? He knows his line of work backwards, he's one of the best. Vas was caught plain and simple. It's time to accept that and move on.

I imagine you would love to have someone on your jury who already thought you were guilty before the trial started and nothing would change their mind. Can Hyatt be impartial? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

What you want is idiots that don't know squat. What you don't know is many programmers have gone over this with a fine-toothed comb and have all reached the same conclusion. This has been under the microscope for years. Stop blaming other programmers for Vasik's criminal activities. Vasik did this to himself. I've never seen such a bunch of whinging people dead set in believing only the the accused no matter what the proof.

Nothing will convince you even if God himself were to appear and give the truth etched in stone by his finger if it meant your god Vasik were to be thrown into the pit.

[mhull]

Of course....but then, without ANY kind of fundamental non engine woud exist, any about nothing. You always make use of some previous ground to do anything, isnt it?

F

Fern, you should be flattered. He is saying your works are worthy of being accused of plagiarizing Shakespeare!

You're out of your element here. Surely you meant to say Cervantes. But you can't improve upon Cervantes (nor Shakespeare).

Not really. I read Cervantes (and Borges BTW), but Billy is still Billy, and even the South Americans concur. They will argue about the best Spanish language writer (or Portuguese), but not that Shakespeare is best, removing the language dispute. It is rather remarkable that a single author, one of the earliest in Modern English, is still so far above in terms of overall quality and sheer volume. Still, building on him is not just about writing nice things, but also establishing techniques and devices, just as Moliere is the father of comedy.

But this doesn't rise to plagiarism or improve upon the masters. It's one thing to incorporate principles and devices to one's own vernacular but quite another to copy text verbatim, which is the only intersection between your analogy and the case at hand. Steal but one paragraph without a footnote and the stain of plagiarism will be difficult to remove. How much more if it be many paragraphs and critical components of the plot!

In programming, especially a chess program, adopting significantly large and critical blocks of very specific symbiotic logic and factored weights verbatim is only permissible in an acknowledged code fork. It certainly couldn't pass the smell test as an original work. And the distance between subsequent versions to the plagiarized starting point will hardly matter (to most people) if a programmer is shown to be so dishonest.