On Vas: a Rybka users point of view

[bigo]

First of all I'd like to say the Vas as well as Larry Kaufman are two outstanding indivisuals of High Chracter. Although there has been several rude accusations against Vas, I have yet to see him strike back in anger or open his mouth at all. I don't think he really has to because the strength of his programs says it all. Vas gave away his program free after this act of generosity he was attacked and hounded out of CCC. Now we have people like Christopher theron speaking evil accusations against him, yet he opened not his mouth in defence. As a customer of vas I can only say that it is completely irrelevant how he displays his nodes. I think the majority of customers feel the same, I have not been cheated by Vas, but i did feel cheated by Theron, he made false statments about the strenth of Tiger 2007 saying it was 100 points stronger then his previous version, we have not seen a significant increase in strength from Tiger 14 to tiger 2007, i think an author that releases a program with exaggerated claims is being dishonest. I don't buy his excuse that his testing was flawed. When his program was on top he was the same arrogant, vile mouthed person he is today, now because he is no longer in the limelight he would attack Vas who hasn't said a single bad word about anyone. Vas has a right to make a living on his talents, why should he give away knowledge of his program to anyone? Personally I think the gentlemen should be given a Nobel peace prize for his development of Rybka. I just had to get this out, after reading the long threads on the subject I had too add my 2 cents.

[Father]

My point of view about Rybka as a chess player, that has been playing diferent kind of engines for more of 30 years, is very simple.

It is the first time in chess history, that a Top machine, the number one in the list, Rybka 3 now, it is at same time an expert anti machine against all gender of machines and a perfect anti human being chess machine.

I have had only two(2) draws in tottal, between several hundreds of games playing against Rybka playing bullets marathons and blitz challengers.

Mr Vasik, his Wife, and chesbase team, has made the best chess machine ever. I was last night very close to won to Rybka 3 in a bullet game, all the distance was of 0.4 seconds and R3 was absolutly blocked. But I did not win. Then, only two draws in a tottal of gigant challenger.

I am not sad becouse of a chess machine has finally destroy the old paradigm, where machines need select between open lines and lose elo, or be it more sure in their moves, and to suffer the impact of the stone wall.

But Rybka 3 is diferent. And with all humilty, I say to chess comunity: First time in my life, a computer does not have an akiles talion. I am seerching and seeking for that. But my only opinion is simple; "CONGRATULLATION TO ALL THE HUMANS BEINGS THAT HAVE MADE TO RYBKA 3 and GIVE TO US THIS BEUTIFFUL ARTISTIC ELEMENT FOR DEVELOMENT OUR INTELLIGENCE."

There are many other strong machines. The competence is not over. But Rybka, is of course a paradigm, like were Owen, Louis, and many other gigants of many sports in sports history.

Wth best respect,

Pablo Ignacio Restrepo
Father Playchess usser

[Bill Rogers]

There are a lot of would be GODS lurching here who think they know the answer to all of chess questions. They seem to think that they should be able to tell programmers what they can and can not do. They also seem to think that they can read peoples minds and read unwritten chess program codes. If they say that program A is a clone of Program B then you had better believe it as they are the Gods of chess.
Because Vas had looked at the source of another chess program that automatically makes his program a clone of sorts. I my opinion this is all a bunch of childish bull shit.
Long before that was such a thing as an 'internet' I longed for a chess program that I could play against. To be more specific one that I might have written myself. Being as there was no source of any kind that I might use a model I had to write my own from scratch, so I did. I even went so far as to release a version of it into public archives. Back then we did not have an internet but had hundreds of BBS's. The public bulitin boards were the for runners of the internet.
At that time we also had a few somewhat large computer clubs. One of those clubs was held at Stanford Linear Accelerater. It wa called the "Homebrew Computer Club" and has some members who were soon to become very famous. Both Steves, Jobs and Woziac were members and I remember when they first brought in the one board color computer which they stated would be great for playing games.
The point of this posting is that I had developed a few algorithms in my little chess program that almost every chess program written today use.
Does that mean that they are all clones of mine? I don't think so and for some others who don't have the mental capacity to write world chess playing programs of thier own should not speak out about someone elses when they don't have one iota of information about the source.
Maybe they think they are impressing every one with thier vast chess knowlege but to me they are only displaying their ignorance.
Bill

[tiger]

My point of view about Rybka as a chess player, that has been playing diferent kind of engines for more of 30 years, is very simple.

It is the first time in chess history, that a Top machine, the number one in the list, Rybka 3 now, it is at same time an expert anti machine against all gender of machines and a perfect anti human being chess machine.

I have had only two(2) draws in tottal, between several hundreds of games playing against Rybka playing bullets marathons and blitz challengers.

Mr Vasik, his Wife, and chesbase team, has made the best chess machine ever. I was last night very close to won to Rybka 3 in a bullet game, all the distance was of 0.4 seconds and R3 was absolutly blocked. But I did not win. Then, only two draws in a tottal of gigant challenger.

I am not sad becouse of a chess machine has finally destroy the old paradigm, where machines need select between open lines and lose elo, or be it more sure in their moves, and to suffer the impact of the stone wall.

But Rybka 3 is diferent. And with all humilty, I say to chess comunity: First time in my life, a computer does not have an akiles talion. I am seerching and seeking for that. But my only opinion is simple; "CONGRATULLATION TO ALL THE HUMANS BEINGS THAT HAVE MADE TO RYBKA 3 and GIVE TO US THIS BEUTIFFUL ARTISTIC ELEMENT FOR DEVELOMENT OUR INTELLIGENCE."

There are many other strong machines. The competence is not over. But Rybka, is of course a paradigm, like were Owen, Louis, and many other gigants of many sports in sports history.

Wth best respect,

Pablo Ignacio Restrepo
Father Playchess usser

But it is not the first time. This is the second time you congratulate a team for creating a chess program that was imune to your anti-chess playing style.

Do you remember who was the first team you have congratulated...?

It was the Chess Tiger team. You could not win against Chess Tiger in anti-human mode.

Who will be the next to be the first one in all human history of the whole universe of all times to resist your no-chess style?



// Christophe

[tiger]

There are a lot of would be GODS lurching here who think they know the answer to all of chess questions. They seem to think that they should be able to tell programmers what they can and can not do. They also seem to think that they can read peoples minds and read unwritten chess program codes. If they say that program A is a clone of Program B then you had better believe it as they are the Gods of chess.
Because Vas had looked at the source of another chess program that automatically makes his program a clone of sorts. I my opinion this is all a bunch of childish bull shit.
Long before that was such a thing as an 'internet' I longed for a chess program that I could play against. To be more specific one that I might have written myself. Being as there was no source of any kind that I might use a model I had to write my own from scratch, so I did. I even went so far as to release a version of it into public archives. Back then we did not have an internet but had hundreds of BBS's. The public bulitin boards were the for runners of the internet.
At that time we also had a few somewhat large computer clubs. One of those clubs was held at Stanford Linear Accelerater. It wa called the "Homebrew Computer Club" and has some members who were soon to become very famous. Both Steves, Jobs and Woziac were members and I remember when they first brought in the one board color computer which they stated would be great for playing games.
The point of this posting is that I had developed a few algorithms in my little chess program that almost every chess program written today use.
Does that mean that they are all clones of mine? I don't think so and for some others who don't have the mental capacity to write world chess playing programs of thier own should not speak out about someone elses when they don't have one iota of information about the source.
Maybe they think they are impressing every one with thier vast chess knowlege but to me they are only displaying their ignorance.
Bill

It's too bad you insist on this cloning issue which has actually not been brought up in the discussion about Fruit and Rybka.

Reusing ideas is fine and I have not seen a single post telling the contrary. Have you?

However there is an open issue about starting from a GPL source code, modifying it, and releasing it as proprietary software.



// Christophe

[fern]

Dear Chris, Pablo only pretend to be nice and sympathetic, not an historian. I look forward for new first of the world salutations as much that stimulate very much people.

A nice word is never out of place regards
Fern

[Rolf]

There are a lot of would be GODS lurching here who think they know the answer to all of chess questions. They seem to think that they should be able to tell programmers what they can and can not do. They also seem to think that they can read peoples minds and read unwritten chess program codes. If they say that program A is a clone of Program B then you had better believe it as they are the Gods of chess.
Because Vas had looked at the source of another chess program that automatically makes his program a clone of sorts. I my opinion this is all a bunch of childish bull shit.
Long before that was such a thing as an 'internet' I longed for a chess program that I could play against. To be more specific one that I might have written myself. Being as there was no source of any kind that I might use a model I had to write my own from scratch, so I did. I even went so far as to release a version of it into public archives. Back then we did not have an internet but had hundreds of BBS's. The public bulitin boards were the for runners of the internet.
At that time we also had a few somewhat large computer clubs. One of those clubs was held at Stanford Linear Accelerater. It wa called the "Homebrew Computer Club" and has some members who were soon to become very famous. Both Steves, Jobs and Woziac were members and I remember when they first brought in the one board color computer which they stated would be great for playing games.
The point of this posting is that I had developed a few algorithms in my little chess program that almost every chess program written today use.
Does that mean that they are all clones of mine? I don't think so and for some others who don't have the mental capacity to write world chess playing programs of thier own should not speak out about someone elses when they don't have one iota of information about the source.
Maybe they think they are impressing every one with thier vast chess knowlege but to me they are only displaying their ignorance.
Bill

It's too bad you insist on this cloning issue which has actually not been brought up in the discussion about Fruit and Rybka.

Reusing ideas is fine and I have not seen a single post telling the contrary. Have you?

However there is an open issue about starting from a GPL source code, modifying it, and releasing it as proprietary software.



// Christophe

Tomorrow I will show you what you have written yourself. About what were not allowed and what Vas HAS done in your eyes. Strange that you cant remember, CT.

[tiger]

First of all I'd like to say the Vas as well as Larry Kaufman are two outstanding indivisuals of High Chracter. Although there has been several rude accusations against Vas, I have yet to see him strike back in anger or open his mouth at all. I don't think he really has to because the strength of his programs says it all.

Your statement is exactly the kind I was reacting against in another thread.

It was the (much flamed) message about Mr Right.

There is the unconscious misconception that the one who is successful is also of high moral value, which leads many to defend her/him without actually studying carefully what is said. Instead, we see a kind of reflex behaviour. The successful one is attacked => I defend her/him.

In another message I wrote about this and tried to find an explanation. After all it's human behaviour and we are all - including me - subject to it.

Maybe it's because two concepts get connected in the subconscious: the concept of being successful and the concept of being of high moral value. The mechanism would be:
- the successful is an example to follow
- the person of high moral value is an example to follow
=> the successful and the person of high moral value are somehow similar

This would create the feeling that someone who is successful must be defended as a person of high moral value.

Vas gave away his program free after this act of generosity he was attacked and hounded out of CCC. Now we have people like Christopher theron speaking evil accusations against him, yet he opened not his mouth in defence.

So you feel the need to defend him, isn't it?

As a customer of vas I can only say that it is completely irrelevant how he displays his nodes. I think the majority of customers feel the same, I have not been cheated by Vas, but i did feel cheated by Theron, he made false statments about the strenth of Tiger 2007 saying it was 100 points stronger then his previous version

This is wrong. I claimed an elo improvement of 80 points between Chess Tiger 15 and Chess Tiger 2007, because this is the improvement I measured.

In the CCRL tests, it turned out that the improvement between CT15 and CT2007 is 63 elo points with some statistical error margin.

Here is the link:

http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/

and you will find the ratings for these versions.

I don't think any customer has been cheated, as the CCRL rating for CT2007 was available a few days after this version has been released. The true strength of a program cannot be hidden and is known very quickly. It would be then completely foolish for an author to claim an irrealist improvement.

, we have not seen a significant increase in strength from Tiger 14 to tiger 2007

You are misinformed.

Here I refer to the SSDF list as the CCRL list has not tested Chess Tiger 14.

From the SSDF list:
18 Chess Tiger 2007 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2769 28 -28 614 51% 2763
52 Chess Tiger 14.0 CB 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2634 23 -22 953 53% 2612

The difference in playing strength, as evaluated by the SSDF, is 151 elo points, with the error margin as quoted above.

The link to the relevant SSDF list is:

http://ssdf.bosjo.net/rlwww072.txt

, i think an author that releases a program with exaggerated claims is being dishonest.

Sorry but you did not have the correct information. If you make your mind about me with the wrong information, sure you are going to find I'm wrong...



[quot]I don't buy his excuse that his testing was flawed. When his program was on top he was the same arrogant, vile mouthed person he is today, now because he is no longer in the limelight he would attack Vas who hasn't said a single bad word about anyone.[/quote]



If you have followed the discussion, it's not about Vas saying anything about anyone, it's about how Rybka started its life.

Vas has a right to make a living on his talents, why should he give away knowledge of his program to anyone?

This I don't understand. Who said he should give away anything to anyone?

Personally I think the gentlemen should be given a Nobel peace prize for his development of Rybka.

Sure...

...Sigh...

I just had to get this out, after reading the long threads on the subject I had too add my 2 cents.

OK, so I understand that you do not care about what we are discussing, which is the origin of the source code of Rybka. You say nothing about this.

But you come and give an opinion which is based on the strength on Rybka. You defend it because it is strong. You don't give any argument to say I'm wrong, you just try to discredit me. you don't seem to be concerned by what I'm saying either.

All of this does not seem to matter. All that matters is that Vas must be a fine person because he has done an admirable work (which is true) and so he must defended.

Your post is a very good example that gives an excellent illustration to my much flamed "Mr Right" post.



// Christophe

[tiger]

I made a mistake in quoting the elo ratings of CT14 and CT2007.

The right numbers from the SSDF list are:

18 Chess Tiger 2007 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2769 28 -28 614 51% 2763
33 Chess Tiger 14.0 CB 256MB Athlon 1200 2709 28 -28 637 58% 2655

So the difference beetween both versions, this time on the same hardware (sorry for the mistake) is 60 elo points.

My apologies for this error. I hope to have corrected it fast enough. Unfortunately I could not edit my own post and fix it in place as more than 15 minutes had already passed.



// Christophe

[Nimzovik]

The death knell of anti computer chess has not been presented yet gentlemen..... Thesis , antithesis -synthesis. Anti computer chess will evolve as do the machines. Indeed Pablo, despite his current admissions has indeed drawn the thing in bullet (or at least come close enuff for it to become a reality and bullet in fighting computers is no small feat. Speaking of monkey time tricks and time bugs of Gui's --is not speeding up the program to play instantly (as compared to creatively) in closed (blocked positions) just a 'MACHINE monkey trick?' Hmmmmmmmmm...........