Marco steps down as Stockfish maintainer

[Uri Blass]

The amount of resources that have been wasted by Ron and his idee-fix of packing TT entries is phenomenal and sets a new record. He has beaten Uri Blass in fishtest trolling, which is no small achievement

I do not agree with the definition of troll by you.
I usually use the word troll for somebody that his target is to cause trouble.

For example if you start discussions that are not related to computer chess in this forum then you are a troll and you can expect moderators to block you.

[Henk]

Yes it's time to ban all "for free" workers. They severely damaged this free market. Better end this unfair competition.

[Sedat Canbaz]

A new hope for Robert Houdart and the Komodo team !

Fully agree ! Free stuff is valueless....................
.........................................Only fools work for free !

Only a fool does not understand the difference between cost and value.

+100

[Sedat Canbaz]

Only fools work for free !

- 'HOBBY' is more important than MONEY !

Hopes this helps...

Unless you don't have Money.

If you take Chess programming seriously it is a full time job. So you can't do that for free. Unless you copy other peoples ideas and code, but we don't like that do we.

If there was no Glaurung there was no Stockfish. Glaurung has not been created by Marco.

So after reading your comments,
Stockfish is not original, hmm... ?!

Do you think that only Stockfish is based or studied from other engines ??
I strongly believe that all Top chess engines each other relative, almost same family...but also they have a lot of own ideas..!!

Btw, can you tell me please:
If Marco Costalba copied the codes from the others, then how he managed to create Stockfish as the World's strongest engine ??

Note that:
-You can't be on top by the work of others !!

[Henk]

Only fools work for free !

- 'HOBBY' is more important than MONEY !

Hopes this helps...

Unless you don't have Money.

If you take Chess programming seriously it is a full time job. So you can't do that for free. Unless you copy other peoples ideas and code, but we don't like that do we.

If there was no Glaurung there was no Stockfish. Glaurung has not been created by Marco.

So after reading your comments,
Stockfish is not original, hmm... ?!

Do you think that only Stockfish is based or studied from other engines ??
I strongly believe that all Top chess engines each other relative, almost same family...but also they have a lot of own ideas..!!

Btw, can you tell me please:
If Marco Costalba copied the codes from the others, then how he managed to create Stockfish as the World's strongest engine ??

Note that:
-You can't be on top by the work of others !!

You can copy code, make it you own and add some new ideas. That is how top engines are created in a short time. Not much originality.

Most ideas come from Cray Blitz and Crafty. Robert Hyatt doesn't work for free.

[Sedat Canbaz]

Only fools work for free !

- 'HOBBY' is more important than MONEY !

Hopes this helps...

Unless you don't have Money.

If you take Chess programming seriously it is a full time job. So you can't do that for free. Unless you copy other peoples ideas and code, but we don't like that do we.

If there was no Glaurung there was no Stockfish. Glaurung has not been created by Marco.

So after reading your comments,
Stockfish is not original, hmm... ?!

Do you think that only Stockfish is based or studied from other engines ??
I strongly believe that all Top chess engines each other relative, almost same family...but also they have a lot of own ideas..!!

Btw, can you tell me please:
If Marco Costalba copied the codes from the others, then how he managed to create Stockfish as the World's strongest engine ??

Note that:
-You can't be on top by the work of others !!

You can copy code, make it you own and add some new ideas. That is how top engines are created in a short time. Not much originality.

Most ideas come from Cray Blitz and Crafty. Robert Hyatt doesn't work for free.

Now I agree with some of your statements...

About Robert Hyatt,
I am surprised I didn't know that...

Btw, what makes me feel sad,
Some of them are trying to show us that their engines are 100% original, where the others are clones....

And as I mentioned before,
Nowadays it is very hard to find 100 % own work

But however,
I have BIG respect to Authors with own ideas, where they released their engines with hundreds of Elo points stronger than previous old versions!!

Btw, I see the Top chess engines like:

[hgm]

So after reading your comments,
Stockfish is not original, hmm... ?!

Do you think that only Stockfish is based or studied from other engines ??
I strongly believe that all Top chess engines each other relative, almost same family...but also they have a lot of own ideas..!!

Btw, can you tell me please:
If Marco Costalba copied the codes from the others, then how he managed to create Stockfish as the World's strongest engine ??

Note that:
-You can't be on top by the work of others !!

You really don't know the history of Stockfish?

I am surprised, because it never was a secret.

[hgm]

An example you should be interested in: only using 8 bits of the hash entry to store depth makes it impossible to store depths > 128 ply (ONE_PLY being 2)

64 in fact. there are negative depths in QS. so the patch is already bogus with depths above 64.

True, I simplified a bit. But I think the patch now shifts values so that the current range of -7 ... 120 fits in 0 ... 127. But it is clear that this is a limitation that is not justified only by saying "it passed the test, so you have to apply".

Well, I think the patch was an interesting one. Especially that it provides Elo to reduce the hash signature to 16 bits. Considering the insensitivity of search to hash collissions that was demonstrated by Bob and co-workers, I once suggested in this forum that 32 bit could be significantly above optimum, but I would not have wanted to bet that 16 would be enough. So it is nice to see a test actually shows this.

I think this 'future flexibility' argument is a rather weak one. How you pack hash entries is pretty much independent of the rest of the engine. If in the future depth larger than the 110 (which was the limit of the proposed scheme) would become important, you simply switch the packing again.

The argument that patches aimed at relieving hash pressure must prove a benefit under conditions where there is no hash pressure, because that happens to be the standard test, is not very convincing either. If anything, it only shows that the standard test conditions suck.

[Henk]

I would like to see a tournament where only the best engines are playing that aren't minimax derivatives so they are not allowed to use alpha beta algorithm.

These engines would play far and far weaker I guess but that can be very entertaining.

It can be difficult to collect these engines for almost every engine uses alpha beta or minimax.

[Sedat Canbaz]

So after reading your comments,
Stockfish is not original, hmm... ?!

Do you think that only Stockfish is based or studied from other engines ??
I strongly believe that all Top chess engines each other relative, almost same family...but also they have a lot of own ideas..!!

Btw, can you tell me please:
If Marco Costalba copied the codes from the others, then how he managed to create Stockfish as the World's strongest engine ??

Note that:
-You can't be on top by the work of others !!

You really don't know the history of Stockfish?

I am surprised, because it never was a secret.

Hello dear H.G.Muller,

I am not surprised that you are on this thread !!))

Yes... a long time past, how we did not discuss each other )))

Some info, which I know about Stockfish:
- the Authors are Tord Romstad, Marco Costalba and Joona Kiiski
- derived from Glaurung
- open source chess engine
- uses the UCI protocol
- available for Desktop and Mobile platforms
- sometimes forfeits on time under Winboard GUI
- can use up to 128 cores
- playing strength is approx. 3500 Elo
- the World's strongest Engine
- available FREE to public


Can you inform me please more about the history of Stockfish ?


Thanks