WCCC 2024 participants are announced

[hgm]

Remind me, which definition was that?

[noobpwnftw]

Look at you. What sour episode did you experience to get this hell bent on selling out to clowns?

You and I both know fully well what this is about.

[hgm]

The difficulty of coming to terms with reality seems to have taken away your ability for rational thinking. Your last few posts don't make any sense at all...

[noobpwnftw]

Unfortunately your version of reality is fading. Appearently the irrelevant event is folding its tent and I'm just making fun of it having to end with a blip.

Maybe next time some fraud will actually win a random prize somewhere by sending in a Dutch version your work and you'd be so proud of it.

Who knows? I get the sentiment though.

[hgm]

What do you imagine to be fading? Has Shashchess been rejected by the ICGA after all?

[chrisw]

What do you imagine to be fading? Has Shashchess been rejected by the ICGA after all?

Somebody, I read here, tested Shashchess against latest SF and got 98% similarity. If so, that's pretty conclusive.

[Rebel]

I don't understand the fuss. It seems obvious that if the 'official' Stockfish had wanted to participate, ICGA would not have accepted Shashchess, as it was clearly pointed out that these share most of their code.

It is up to ICGA to decide which engines they allow to run, and their policy has always been to accept any entry as long as the origin of the code is known, and its use is legal.

There seems to be some confusion about the concept of originality here; for the ICGA the only aspect of it that matters is that all participants are fully different, and not derivatives of each other. They must be fully original within the pool of participants. It was never a requirement that the person operating the machine and accepting the trophy had written 100% of the code; in fact it has frequently happened this person did not contribute any code at all. As long as the origin of the code is made public, this is fine.

Since the Stockfish code is available under GPL, its use in Shashchess is legal, provided the latter is open source. Which appears to be the case here.

Lying about the origin of the engine's code is a transgression of the WCCC rules that ICGA takes quite seriously, though.

In the past (so not sure if the rule is still exists) several improved derivatives (among them Fruit derivatives) have played in the WCCC, but not without the express permission of the original author, Fabien in this case.

[CRoberson]

GridChess using Fritz
Johnny
Leela Chess Zero
Raptor
rofChade
Shashchess
Stoofvlees
Tech 4
Tornado

Where did you get this? I went to icga.org and I don't see it.

[hgm]

Somebody, I read here, tested Shashchess against latest SF and got 98% similarity. If so, that's pretty conclusive.

Conclusive for what? It is not contested by anyone that Shashchess is a close Stockfish derivative. ICGA is well aware of it. So what is there to conclude that wasn't known beforehand?

[hgm]

In the past (so not sure if the rule is still exists) several improved derivatives (among them Fruit derivatives) have played in the WCCC, but not without the express permission of the original author, Fabien in this case.

Indeed, there never has been a rule against accepting derivatives. At most there might have been a different interpretation of what 'permission of all contributing authors' means. In particular whether they consider a GPL license for the code sufficient permission or whether this requires a signed letter of one or all of the authors.

The WCCC rules originally were drawn up before the internet era, and were not really tailored for large-scale cooperative projects like nowadays are common. Adhering to an unnecessarily strict interpetation of these rules that interferes with their goals would be plain stupid. So it should not surprise anyone they adapt their interpretations, or even the rules, to what leads to the optimum result in this modern era.