strelka 2.0

[Ryan Benitez]

Take a version of Fritz that plays 2850 uniprocessor 32 bit and disassemble it and completely recreate the C of the Original Fritz.

Rick.

Please take the Fritz binary and try completely recreate it into C.
If you can make this work during one year or two, you may claim that this is possible.
If not, don't talk about things in which you are not competent.

You assume his time is free? If someone offered the right price I am sure at least 10 capable programmers on this forum would respond.

[slobo]

Rick.

Please take the Fritz binary and try completely recreate it into C.
If you can make this work during one year or two, you may claim that this is possible.
If not, don't talk about things in which you are not competent.

I think Rick has the competence to reverse engineer Fritz in 1 or 2 years.
However, he must have a very personal interest before doing so.
Nobody can invest so much time and effort just to prove to other people that it is possible.
Both of you have talent. Stop arguing each other .

Matthias.

Don´t have pity of his time, Matthias.
Do you think, Rick had been wasting his noble time in a better way while trying to demonstrate that Strelka is a "fraud"? (By the way, he doesn´t know what the word "fraud" means, although he is an English speaker.)

But, I am sure, he would do much better use of his time if he tries to write his own engine; or, if he finds it too boring, he could at least try to reverse Fritz 5 to C, for a change.

From Dictionary.com:

fraud

1. deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

2. a particular instance of such deceit or trickery: mail fraud; election frauds.

3. any deception, trickery, or humbug: That diet book is a fraud and a waste of time.

4. a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.

----------------

This word fits what Jury Osipov has done, and this word fits the situation perfectly.

I have a few pages of proof, where I show an exact alignment and match of internal details in Rybka with the source of Strelka. I can show these internal details of Rybka because they are already published in Strelka.

Converting the machine language of Rybka into C and then putting your name on this software, that is fraud.

Also I read a posting by Vas on the Rybka forum where he says that his name should be on Strelka as the author. He says it's a reverse engineered Rybka.

Hi Rick,

Ok, we have now the dictionary content, but in spite of this you don´t interpret it well; you are confused about the meaning of the word "fraud".

Fraud may exist when a contradiction appears: when a concept suggests one meaning and the reality another one, the one that denies it.

We would have a fraud if Osipov says, for example: "Strelka is an original engine", or "I am the author of that original engine". That would be a fraud because we would have a contradiction between a concept and the reality.

But Osipov doesn´t say nothing of these, and that is the problem you don´t handle well.

Read my next comment.

[slobo]

People are saying why not write an engine?

I did write an engine from scratch recently. I was feeling a little burnt out on chess engines so I wrote a system that plays the game of Chaxx. Later I found out the game is nearly identical to Camelot. My system has a lot of advanced algorithms adapted from Chess, and the play of the engine is amazing at times. So yesterday my engine played against the founder of the World Camelot Foundation. This excellent player, Michael Nolan says my engine is a tactical monster. So for part of the day today I worked on a few things to make this system easier to use (my program that plays Camelot).

With a number of folks saying "work on an engine"... Yes, I have been working on an engine. My system is 13,000 lines of highly readable C++ that I wrote recently, and the system works well but it also has a lot of potential for being significantly improved. For example I created a rudamentary Evaluation function based upon my observations of playing the game, and I also added a number of terms to counteract some blind spots that allowed me to win games.

Working on Camelot for a change is a true challenge because each move can extend on, taking possibly all of the oponents pieces. This is of course quite a bit different from Chess and so I find working on this game is challenging, it's fun, and working on this is like taking a vaction from computer chess. I feel refreshed from this experience.

My thoughts in computer chess lately have centered around curiousity about the successful techniques within Rybka. As I have unraveled Rybka (and the main tool was the use of Strelka) I have found the experience to be extremely satisfying. This is one of the most interesting things I've done in computer chess (recently).

Think again about that last observation of yours:
As I have unraveled Rybka (and the main tool was the use of Strelka) I have found the experience to be extremely satisfying.

IMHO, you should demonstrate more respect to Osipov. It was thanks to him, too, that you was able to enjoy your experience.

Think about this.

All the best.

[ozziejoe]

You said:

"We would have a fraud if Osipov says, for example: "Strelka is an original engine", or "I am the author of that original engine". That would be a fraud because we would have a contradiction between a concept and the reality.

But Osipov doesn´t say nothing of these, and that is the problem you don´t handle well."

A man who beats his wife and brags about it-----still beats his wife. He is no fraud, true, but he is still a piece of sh%$t.

Stealing programming from another and then making it public is morally repugnant to me. I think it is especially bad in computer chess, where the talented programmers are struggling to make a living.

And then there is the attempt of the author of strelka to spoil vasik's reputation (by accusing him of stealing fruit code). That is not fraud, true, but is it slander? Did not Fabien (of fruit) look at the strelka code and say it was not stolen (and I trust uri on this report)? Fruit ideas where there, but not code.

The continued defense of the strelka clone is one of the strangest, most inexplicable thing on this listserve. I have seen other cloners dismissed universally. What makes the author of strelka special? Is it that his unethical act required some intelligence?


peace my friends

J


[/quote]

[Tony Thomas]

Is it that his unethical act required some intelligence?


peace my friends

J

No one else ever managed to disassemble the strongest engine and release it as an open source engine. May be Tord did, look out all Strelka's and Fruitkas, Glaurung has entered the ring.

[Ryan Benitez]

Is it that his unethical act required some intelligence?


peace my friends

J

No one else ever managed to disassemble the strongest engine and release it as an open source engine. May be Tord did, look out all Strelka's and Fruitkas, Glaurung has entered the ring. [/quote]

No one I know of has had the goal to disassemble a chess program and release it. I don't know why you mention Tord; he is as original as one can be in computer chess today. His engines improvement (80+ elo so far it seems) over his last very good version is due to his skill and experience. No disassembly required.

[Tony Thomas]

Is it that his unethical act required some intelligence?


peace my friends

J

No one else ever managed to disassemble the strongest engine and release it as an open source engine. May be Tord did, look out all Strelka's and Fruitkas, Glaurung has entered the ring.

No one I know of has had the goal to disassemble a chess program and release it. I don't know why you mention Tord; he is as original as one can be in computer chess today. His engines improvement (80+ elo so far it seems) over his last very good version is due to his skill and experience. No disassembly required.[/quote]

I was trying to make a joke.. His latest version is a threat to even commercial engines.

[Ryan Benitez]

Is it that his unethical act required some intelligence?


peace my friends

J

No one else ever managed to disassemble the strongest engine and release it as an open source engine. May be Tord did, look out all Strelka's and Fruitkas, Glaurung has entered the ring.

No one I know of has had the goal to disassemble a chess program and release it. I don't know why you mention Tord; he is as original as one can be in computer chess today. His engines improvement (80+ elo so far it seems) over his last very good version is due to his skill and experience. No disassembly required.

I was trying to make a joke.. His latest version is a threat to even commercial engines.

Oh, sorry I did not get that it was a joke. Yes his engine is a "threat" to commercial engines but it is also a gift to the progress of computer chess.

[ozziejoe]

Go tord!. When i saw the strength of glarung epslon, I was hopeful that it was just the begining of a future number 1

I assume the new glarung is only available for testers now?

best

J

[Eelco de Groot]

Go tord!. When i saw the strength of glarung epslon, I was hopeful that it was just the begining of a future number 1

I assume the new glarung is only available for testers now?

best

J

Hello Joseph,

Yes, I think Glaurung is still in a testing phase but if you would like to test maybe you should send an e-mail to Tord? He posted in a thread that is now on page two: http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20733

Eelco