Interesting reflection on a past statement

[Terry McCracken]

Testers were invited to be on the panel. I am as good as any that exist-and trust me again- letting me onto the panel would have been ridiculous! Put me down for a fool there as well.


gts

One day you might get a fact right. No Testers were invited onto the Panel. A few applied to join it and most were accepted.

It would be an accident. There's a name for his and their syndrome; but I'm not sure how to spell it?

[bob]

Testers were invited to be on the panel. I am as good as any that exist-and trust me again- letting me onto the panel would have been ridiculous! Put me down for a fool there as well.


gts

One day you might get a fact right. No Testers were invited onto the Panel. A few applied to join it and most were accepted.

It would be an accident. There's a name for his and their syndrome; but I'm not sure how to spell it?

"prevaricator maximus" (pardon to the road-runner cartoon show)...

[bob]

Where, in the ICGA rules, does it say "if parts of your code were written by someone else, you must identify them as authors on your program?" Oh yes, that would be rule # 2, would it not?

It might have started with that, but if the rules say you have to cooperate with the ICGA when allegations of cheating are made then Vas getting kicked out isn't about copying code at all. It didn't get to that point.

Looking at binaries isn't enough to make a ruling about cheating. I think a lot of people are upset about this point. In my opinion the evidence reported certainly was enough to warrant a review in which Vas refused to participate.

Does the ICGA run open source only brackets as well as open/closed? For me the open source tournaments would be the most interesting to watch anyways.

No. At one time it was pretty close when commercial programs all competed in the WMCCC events only in the commercial division. They really didn't want to deal with the "big iron" entries where they had little chance of a victory and very good chances for very bad publicity.

Later, some participated in such events using odd names...

[bob]

1. I am not talking about cloning which IMO is to take source code as a whole, modify it and then call it your own. Copying is wrong.

2. It's not wrong to implement everything you learned from free sources in your own existing engine in your own written code.

Despite the socialization of strong engine knowledge, and the danger in coming close to implement the same set of eval features in the same manner, which cardinality even seems to decrease under the current paradigms, we and tournament organizers should still condemn 1:1 copying of vast parts of eval and/or search including trivial translation concerning the board representation.

Absolutely. And spoken in general.

But when it's about Rybka (1) did not happen, but (2) did and Vasik never made a secret about it. I am preparing a document about that because I feel this historic event needs an alternative view and I hope to finish it soon. Perhaps we can talk then in the Programmer section.

Anyways, these strong sources are out there and are not going away and are a threat for fair play and somehow we need find solutions to beat the clones. I will offer 2 brainstorm ideas.

The problem is if (2) becomes too close to (1).

A bigger problem.. (2) did not happen either. While he did not copy all of fruit, he copied parts. He did NOT write his evaluation from scratch. That's been proven beyond any doubt...