Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

[Terry McCracken]

Learn to read and forget about childish anger, I wrote "At least that then their own work would be questioned."

At least Vas has never denied that he was inspired by ideas in Fruit in the beginning. What do you in special can know about what other professionals might have done?

A lot more than you Rolf, a heck of a lot more than you!

You completely miss the point or pretend you do then project that failing on others. Well it doesn't work Rolf, forget using swindles, they bring you to a quick demise against real knowledge/expertise and experience.

You are the one displaying childish behaviour and I won't let you off the hook!

As far as reading and comprending what I read and grasp is vastly superiour to your own ability!

Your digressive tirades don't help your lost postion, rather you're driven to the corner of the board and mated. Worse, you allow one to deliver a helpmate in most cases.

Sad really...

[kranium]

Also get this straight, it has nothing to do with contempt or jealousy over Rybka, if Christophe used the same technique as Vas or any top programmer the gap between not only Vasik's program but all chess programs would be negligible.

I disagree with the assumption that the gap between all chess program is going to be negligible in that case.

The only correct thing is that in this case programs are going to be stronger.

Uri

They ARE stronger, Uri. What is known about the actual strength of the known top programs if one assumes theoretically that Fruit did never exist? Why cant we state that there is a time ante and post Fruit ideas of programming? I simply dont support the campaign here that ONLY Vas has been inspired by Fabien's Fruit ideas.

I agree that not only Vas was inspired by Fabien's Fruit ideas.
The point is not fruit's idea but fruit's code and there is a difference between using fruit's code and using fruit's ideas.

My point is that even if all programmers use fruit's code there is going to be significant difference between playing strength of different programs.

Uri

At least Vas has never denied that he was inspired by ideas in Fruit in the beginning.

Rolf I would like to point out that being inspired by 'ideas' was never specified by Vas. His supporters have always carefully clarified his original comment...

From his interview with Frank Quisinsky and Alexander Schmidt 05.12.2005, the exact quote follows:

Vasik Rajlich: Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake:
Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.

note he says: 'took many things'
(there is no differentiation here between ideas, inspiration, fragments, chunks, tables, names, structure, etc.)

he also states that every commercial program immediately benefited...?
i guess fruit 2.1 was simply considered fair game at that time...

[Uri Blass]

Also get this straight, it has nothing to do with contempt or jealousy over Rybka, if Christophe used the same technique as Vas or any top programmer the gap between not only Vasik's program but all chess programs would be negligible.

I disagree with the assumption that the gap between all chess program is going to be negligible in that case.

The only correct thing is that in this case programs are going to be stronger.

Uri

They ARE stronger, Uri. What is known about the actual strength of the known top programs if one assumes theoretically that Fruit did never exist? Why cant we state that there is a time ante and post Fruit ideas of programming? I simply dont support the campaign here that ONLY Vas has been inspired by Fabien's Fruit ideas.

I agree that not only Vas was inspired by Fabien's Fruit ideas.
The point is not fruit's idea but fruit's code and there is a difference between using fruit's code and using fruit's ideas.

My point is that even if all programmers use fruit's code there is going to be significant difference between playing strength of different programs.

Uri

From his interview with Frank Quisinsky and Alexander Schmidt 05.12.2005, the exact quote follows:

Vasik Rajlich: Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake:
Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.

note he says: 'took many things'
(there is no differentiation here between ideas, fragments, chunks, tables, names, structure, etc.)

he also states that every commercial program immediately benefited...?
i guess fruit 2.1 was considered fair game at that time...

I believe that part of the commercial programmers also took many things from fruit2.1(not less than Vas) but they were less succesful in improving their program.

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

[kranium]

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

the enormous amount of evidence now being presented has nothing to do with it? this sounds like the 'envy' defense...i think that argument is weak, and getting kinda old really.

[Rolf]

More specifically, the evidence is posted to show that a work derived from GPL'ed source code has been published as closed source, when the spirit of the GPL licence under which the original work was published is to always allow the source code to be kept open and shared. It is not only against the spirit, it is also explicitely forbidden by the GPL licence, which is the licence the author of the original work has chosen.
// Christophe

let us suppose for discussion purposes that engine B(a closed commercially sold product) is derived from Engine A which is an open program released under the GPL Licence
what recourse is there and to whom can this charge be directed ?
must the author of Engine A make the charge?
can others make the claim for him?
suppose author A no longer cares about his work or is deceased?
can Author A give private permission to author B to continue his work commercially?

i am asking because i do not know if there is any group or persons responsible to insure that GPL licenses are respected
if there is no one to register a complaint with,, then all we have here .. in my hypothetical example ..is a violation of the Spirit of a licence with no legal recourse..
other then universal condemnation from other programmers in public and private forums ..it would seem that in this case.. one is free to take for his own, the work of others and sell it in the open market

again i am posing a hypothetical question ..a worst case scenario

Steve

If this community would know what you mean with hypothetical then the whole campaign against Vas wouldnt exist. Because just for you we are all talking in such a hypothetical manner. If someone concludes something as factual then he must be wrong.

In the moment a commercial one is being hurt in his financial regard you will be able to watch what happens in legal terms. If a really successful commercial one would participate in the actual campaign against Vas and it had consequences of the described manner then you could watch again what happens.

But actually, Steve, let's get this straight, if people attack Vas who have allegedly either cheated the community with proven wrongs or who allegedly have done so, I can only name what I've read here from reliable sources, or if comes from really young talents with no business to offer in the gamble, then of course that has no impact at all other than a waste of bandwith and a destruction of friendship bonds, which seems to mean not so much for some - in the short run, but they obviously miss the long-term effects.

Steve, therefore I use the term campaign which says it all. If the "other" side against Vas had watertight proof there wouldnt be a campaign but a court case to talk about. You must not invent campaigns if something is proven beyond reasonable doubts. If you dont have such proof and dont want to tell or to admit it, then you cant use the "hypothetical" notion all the time because that would rather weaken your propaganda.

I quote by heart what George had written so clear and convincable:

in such a case you must decide if you have enough proof for a court trial but then you should go for it but if you have doubts and not enough in your hands you shouldnt go for smear acts after the antique motto "semper aliquid haeret". In this case people have made their decision, because those who are actively against Vas have no proof but much free energy for campaigns.

[Rolf]

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

the enormous amount of evidence now being presented has nothing to do with it? this sounds like the 'envy' defense...i think that argument is weak, and getting kinda old really.

Not at all. The question remains what sort of relevance the evidence has that you are talking about... Has it already a direct legal impact and more: would you show your complete wealth on the table for a court case? Or do you just want to persuade potent money owners to support you?

[Rolf]

I believe that part of the commercial programmers also took many things from fruit2.1(not less than Vas) but they were less succesful in improving their program.

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

Uri, thanks for so much trivial clarity. As you could see already, Norm is quite unhappy with this, he already deleted your most important first paragraphe and chose to comment on the second only. But the first is the key for the actual tragico-comedy.

[kranium]

I believe that part of the commercial programmers also took many things from fruit2.1(not less than Vas) but they were less succesful in improving their program.

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

Uri, thanks for so much trivial clarity. As you could see already, Norm is quite unhappy with this, he already deleted your most important first paragraphe and chose to comment on the second only. But the first is the key for the actual tragico-comedy.

this thread is about rybka and strelka...not all commercial programs,
besides:
two wrongs doesn't make it right...

[Rolf]

I believe that part of the commercial programmers also took many things from fruit2.1(not less than Vas) but they were less succesful in improving their program.

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

Uri, thanks for so much trivial clarity. As you could see already, Norm is quite unhappy with this, he already deleted your most important first paragraphe and chose to comment on the second only. But the first is the key for the actual tragico-comedy.

this thread is about rybka and strelka...not all commercial programs,
besides:
two wrongs doesn't make it right...

Neither legally wrong or morally tasteless. Peace?

[tiger]

Also get this straight, it has nothing to do with contempt or jealousy over Rybka, if Christophe used the same technique as Vas or any top programmer the gap between not only Vasik's program but all chess programs would be negligible.

I disagree with the assumption that the gap between all chess program is going to be negligible in that case.

The only correct thing is that in this case programs are going to be stronger.

Uri

They ARE stronger, Uri. What is known about the actual strength of the known top programs if one assumes theoretically that Fruit did never exist? Why cant we state that there is a time ante and post Fruit ideas of programming? I simply dont support the campaign here that ONLY Vas has been inspired by Fabien's Fruit ideas.

I agree that not only Vas was inspired by Fabien's Fruit ideas.
The point is not fruit's idea but fruit's code and there is a difference between using fruit's code and using fruit's ideas.

My point is that even if all programmers use fruit's code there is going to be significant difference between playing strength of different programs.

Uri

From his interview with Frank Quisinsky and Alexander Schmidt 05.12.2005, the exact quote follows:

Vasik Rajlich: Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake:
Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.

note he says: 'took many things'
(there is no differentiation here between ideas, fragments, chunks, tables, names, structure, etc.)

he also states that every commercial program immediately benefited...?
i guess fruit 2.1 was considered fair game at that time...

I believe that part of the commercial programmers also took many things from fruit2.1(not less than Vas) but they were less succesful in improving their program.

Not all of them but part of them.
The reason that people talk only about rybka as fruit derivative is simply the fact that rybka is number 1.

Uri

I'm not aware about any commercial program that would show such large code similarities and even long identical sections of code. If you can find them, please report them.

The reason people talk about Rybka 1.0 being a Fruit 2.1 derivative is simply the fact that it looks from analysis that it is. If you believe it is not, please contradict the factual evidence.



// Christophe