WCCC 2024 participants are announced

[Graham Banks]

Why do ICGA want any SF to participate in the first place? A walking reminder of their past failure?

Those people never liked anyone outside their circle anyways, not hard to imagine how people this desperate for attention would eventually come together.

I think they'd have been thrilled to have Stockfish play in any of their events, but nobody from the SF team was ever interested I guess.

[noobpwnftw]

No need to guess, they chose to sit on a clone for two months instead of trying to ask anyone should explain enough already.

[Graham Banks]

No need to guess, they chose to sit on a clone for two months instead of trying to ask anyone should explain enough already.

I believe it has always been an open invitation. Nobody needed to wait for a specific invite.

Just as an aside, I've always believed the meaning of the word clone to be an exact copy of something.
If you believe that Shashchess is weaker than SF, then how can it be a clone?
This is why I believe the word derivative is more accurate.

[noobpwnftw]

They are simply irrelevant, therefore there is no serious reason to work towards.

And of course, you are free to twist it anyway you like given the fact that you haven't admitted to Houdini being a SF "derivative" so there is that.

[Graham Banks]

They are simply irrelevant, therefore there is no serious reason to work towards.

And of course, you are free to twist it anyway you like given the fact that you haven't admitted to Houdini being a SF "derivative" so there is that.

This is not a discussion about Houdini.

However, you'll find in CCRL engine notes the following:

There has been some concern in the chess community that some versions of Houdini may contain substantial parts of Stockfish code. In November 2022, a legal settlement regarding GPL compliance in respect of Fat Fritz 2 and Houdini 6 was reached between Chessbase and the Stockfish team, see links above.

[noobpwnftw]

Just as an aside that your history of accommodation to authorship seems questionable at best.

[Graham Banks]

Just as an aside that your history of accommodation to authorship seems questionable at best.

Some expansion on that would be nice.

[noobpwnftw]

To at least get something back on topic, in comparison to ICGA, they at least went this far as to strip Rybka from its past titles earned after their entire originality crusade. Then for you, despite numerous complaints regarding the Houdini matter, even to this day, you have never had it properly classified accordingly. Your common excuse when things get obvious is you've got nothing to do with any of the engine developers, also don't care what they may send, your sacred "tester perks" are above anything including accomplice to spreading lies. Would've been better to learn from ICGA to at least stand by their stance, maybe not until this time they are appearently walking back from that crusade which is the reason I'm making fun of them.

If you don't really care about originality then it isn't really in your best interest trying to differenciate between clones and derivatives, if you do have any sense of honoring authorship then we wouldn't be here talking about Houdini again.

[Graham Banks]

To at least get something back on topic, in comparison to ICGA, they at least went this far as to strip Rybka from its past titles earned after their entire originality crusade. Then for you, despite numerous complaints regarding the Houdini matter, even to this day, you have never had it properly classified accordingly. Your common excuse when things get obvious is you've got nothing to do with any of the engine developers, also don't care what they may send. Would've been better to learn from ICGA to at least stand by their stance, until this time they appearently are walking back from that crusade which is the reason I'm making fun of them.

If you don't really care about originality then it isn't really in your best interest trying to differenciate between clones and derivatives, if you do have any sense of honoring authorship then we wouldn't be here talking about Houdini again.

I much prefer originality in that I applaud engine authors who train their net from self-play games.

Although I'm a huge SF fan, I was disappointed that the developers opened the door for the authors of other engines to use Leela data.
That has become a big problem in attempting to retain a decent amount of originality between the top engines, as I'm guessing that Ed was recently trying to get at.

[noobpwnftw]

Now who is getting off topic?

I think I have answered your confusion quite throughouly and your response is then about something else.

You are obviously free to be disappointed and act accordingly, for example by putting them under a same cataglory. People can get sour that even with the same Leela data, they are training into significantly worse nets, and I've seen worse frustration regarding SF search that HGM went this far as to claim it being a library function, probably because he couldn't make anything better. A significant portion of work were put into designing the net architectures as well as tooling and as it is obvious both SF and Leela have been involving their architectures that are dramatically different than any other. What part of originality is now lesser is actually a question quite far fetched. I'm guessing you wouldn't be suggesting any money gating on them in terms of own data generation being a criteria, are you?

But then again what does this has anything to do with WCCC? Are they the same group of people whos behind those poor judgements?