Houdini with 1:1 Robbolito-code?

[Thomas Mayer]

Well, Robbolito is pubic domain, right? So there would be nothing wrong with this.

The Robbolito versions that are being used in the code comparison above are 0.085g3 and 0.09.
These have been meticulously translated to common English programming terms.
The are greatly modified, improved, stronger, and bug-free versions (with lots of original coding and ideas) of the very original ippolit.wikispaces.com Robbolito releases.

They were released by myself and Sentinel under GPL license from www.chesslogik.com.

Hi Norman,

I believe you know what Mr. Houdart thinks about your work and contribution to the Ippolit-series of engines:

The so-called "GPL-licensed" version Norman released later is virtually identical to this 0.085f1 version, if you inspect the source codes you will find no changes other than translating files and variables to English and reorganizing spaces.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ht=#428076

Greets, Thomas

[kranium]

Well, Robbolito is pubic domain, right? So there would be nothing wrong with this.

The Robbolito versions that are being used in the code comparison above are 0.085g3 and 0.09.
These have been meticulously translated to common English programming terms.
The are greatly modified, improved, stronger, and bug-free versions (with lots of original coding and ideas) of the very original ippolit.wikispaces.com Robbolito releases.

They were released by myself and Sentinel under GPL license from www.chesslogik.com.

Hi Norman,

I believe you know what Mr. Houdart thinks about your work and contribution to the Ippolit-series of engines:

The so-called "GPL-licensed" version Norman released later is virtually identical to this 0.085f1 version, if you inspect the source codes you will find no changes other than translating files and variables to English and reorganizing spaces.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ht=#428076

Greets, Thomas

Hi Thomas,

Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.
Robert

After this and many other quotes from Robert, and all the 'word dancing', I'm finding it hard quite frankly to believe anything he says.

There is ample original code written by myself and Sentinel...anyone can look and compare. The source code for both are readily available.

I'll list it all here if that helps...but I'm loathe to confuse the thread with pages and pages of code comparisions
...is that really necessary?

[Matthias Gemuh]

Well the 1st thing I can think of regarding 'bugs' is that the original Robbolito's UCI output used long long integers and was causing issues.

Basically I fixed it by type defining an unsigned 64-bit integer, and called it I64u...

I thought you meant bugs

HGM's subsequent question confines Norman to portions of Robbo not necessarilly affected by bugfixes. Is that hard to understand ?

BTW, Norman's type definition that RH has copied is undeniable proof of "copy & paste".

[mwyoung]

But that really tells it all, doesn't it? The FSF, being copyright holder of Fruit, would certainly take legal action on such obvious infringement on their rights as source copying in a public-domain project.

Therefore it stands to reason we assume Robbolito not to contain such code, in the absense of proof to the contrary.

Yes most likely....

Now the Question is why are people attacking Houdini and Robert Houdart, when it has not been shown to be illegal.

My theory is they got board bashing Rybka, so they want a new target to bash. Seems to be a need to gin up hate on someone.

[kranium]

The so-called "GPL-licensed" version Norman released later is virtually identical to this 0.085f1 version, if you inspect the source codes you will find no changes other than translating files and variables to English and reorganizing spaces.

Houdart's statement above is false...

here are some of the changes implemented in 0.09

-The source code readability greatly improved, more translations added and updated, indentation and white space usage unified and standardized
-All new features easy adjustable during compilation time by setting appropriate switches in robbolito.h
-Alignment of hash structures improved
-New, improved bit scan functions
-Improved rand functions (Mersenne Twist) implemented
-New version of popcnt function as an option
-Cache prefetching added
-New smooth scaling of null move, inspired by Dann Corbit's idea, and modified for Robbolito
-Improved time management especially in time controls without increment and tournament,
-Time management var Increase_Depth communicates with search to ensure proper search depth is reached before returning from search
-Move on PonderHit

[SchachProfi]

What makes me sick is someone here stealing all the Ippolit-ideas&code - luring in the corresponding fora, slightly modifing&tweaking it (most likely with other code out of Stockfish or whereever it comes from) and then selling it not just as own invention, but also for Euros... and from what i have heard his installers try to send the half harddisk to www.cruxis.com... unethical is a conservative word for what i think about all this Houdini2-affair.

[kranium]

But that really tells it all, doesn't it? The FSF, being copyright holder of Fruit, would certainly take legal action on such obvious infringement on their rights as source copying in a public-domain project.

Therefore it stands to reason we assume Robbolito not to contain such code, in the absense of proof to the contrary.

Yes most likely....

Now the Question is why are people attacking Houdini and Robert Houdart, when it has not been shown to be illegal.

My theory is they got board bashing Rybka, so they want a new target to bash. Seems to be a need to gin up hate on someone.

No one is attacking him...it's not personal.

On then contrary it's quite a simple matter:
Robbolito 0.09 and 0.085g were released under a GPL (license).
Copying GPL source code for a 'closed source' program is illegal,
and it is becoming clear that this is what happened, ... the proof is steadily accumulating.

It's also clear that he is being evasive, sometimes outright lying, and often 'word dancing' concerning this issue.
Didn't we just go through that for 5 years with Vas?

...let's demand the truth and not let it happen again.

[JuLieN]

But that really tells it all, doesn't it? The FSF, being copyright holder of Fruit, would certainly take legal action on such obvious infringement on their rights as source copying in a public-domain project.

Therefore it stands to reason we assume Robbolito not to contain such code, in the absense of proof to the contrary.

Yes most likely....

Now the Question is why are people attacking Houdini and Robert Houdart, when it has not been shown to be illegal.

My theory is they got board bashing Rybka, so they want a new target to bash. Seems to be a need to gin up hate on someone.

No one is attacking him...it's not personal.

On then contrary it's quite a simple matter:
Robbolito 0.09 and 0.085g were released under a GPL (license).
Copying GPL source code for a 'closed source' program is illegal,
and it is becoming clear that this is what happened, ... the proof is steadily accumulating.

It's also clear that he is being evasive, sometimes outright lying, and often 'word dancing' concerning this issue.
Didn't we just go through that for 5 years with Vas?

...let's demand the truth and not let it happen again.

Norman, I must say (and it is a genuinely positive point), that when you were caught doing the same thing, you :
1- never denied it, and, at the contrary, admitted it;
2- put an end to this infraction;
3- refunded your customers.

When you compare this with what happened with Rybka and Houdini, this put your actions into a much more positive perspective. I don't know if you care about my opinion on this matter, but I say it anyway: this erases a whole deal of your past errors.

[geots]

You make me sick.

I will certainly second that. I haven't even checked yet to see whose thread you refer to. But if he makes you sick- then he makes me sick alos

gts

[M ANSARI]

I think what most of you have not taken into account is that Robert had a long time to do exactly what Norman did with Ippolit code. Remember we are talking about Houdini 2.0 and not the earlier versions which might have had some stuff copied from the more legible translations of Ippolit code. The only person who can cause a problem with the Ippolit code would be Vas, and since he doesn't seem interested in following this up ... Houdini has nothing to worry about. Ippolit code is public domain and a GPL will simply not hold because it is a simple modification of the PD code, and Robert could easily do what Norman and others did with Ippolit code.

Remember there has been quite a long time since the 1.5 release, and I am sure that any reasonable programmer would be able to make the code squeaky clean. So unless Vas goes to court and get a ruling that Ippolit is stolen code from Rybka, this issue is a non starter.