hgm wrote:Modern Times wrote:Sure, but the so-called "facts" in the Rybka base are still disputed to this day.
A pity that original source code was not available, that would have enabled a far more reliable verdict to be reached. Of course the ICGA rules themselves were not exactly clear either, there is rooom for interpretation there too.
Indeed, the main and undisputed
fact is that he did not show any source code. That in itself is sufficient reason to ban him from ICGA tournaments, but it does not constitute proof that it was a Fruit derivative.
But whether it is, can be decided by examination of the binary. Opinions of those that have not done that carry no weight whatsoever.
Those that keep pointing at Rybka like it is some panacea for the current predicament of computer Chess completely miss the point. Rybka is history, Stockfish / Komodo / Houdini / Ivanhoe are the present. The real problem is Ippolit, its questionable legal status, its shady authors and its frequent cloning.
I give right and I can understand Vasik Rajlich's reaction...
About why Vas did not show any source code...
And if I was in Vasik Rajlich's shoes probably I would not too..!!!
Maybe you forgot, but I still remember,
About the signed open-letter by many opponents (against Vasik Rajlich)
There is no doubt that for many chess friends,
This signed opened-letter will be remembered as a black shadow in Computer Chess!!!
And who knows...
Perhaps, it's time to be collected similar signatures against my chess activities too ?!))
In this case, the moderators will less work and we will see less locked topics )))
Btw, I am not Vas, I am Sedat ))
This system will not work...the previous who tried are ended without success !!