chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
Thanks for your efforts regarding Rybka. I think Rybka is clean.
Vas does not really have to say anything or show anyone his code.
Best to you,
Gerold.
Hi Gerold,
i agree, he should not and does not have to show anyone his code.
he seems interested in answering the questions, though...
people are simply requesting an explanation as to why hundreds of (identical/equivilent) lines of code appear in both fruit 2.1 and strelka 2.0.,
etc.
i think that's a fair question...
Unfortunately, based on a post of his (link given above) you are not likely to get substantive answers. Just "it is likely that if we use the same algorithm, we will produce the same code." Even though decades of academic experience spread over every university offering a computer science or programming degree says otherwise.
I see. So there's no point in putting concrete concerns with evidence to him because, according to you, you won't get a substantive answer. Your decades trll you so.
Are you actually able to generate a list of concrete concerns? For example some code similarities between Rybka and Fruit?
If not, the case against Rybka is just so much hot air.
You think he can't??
The sad part is, your defence for Vas obviously biased, (although I don't know your motives), are not helping Vasik's case. In fact the reverse is true.
Speaking of hot air...
Anyway, the FSF has to get involved.
Regardless of all this I hope things work out in the wash as I'd like to see Rybka continue to evolve, it's just too good a program to see it killed!
However, I don't want to see people breaking the GPL to get ahead as the new trend in computer programing.
Terry
I don't know if he (or others) can. We'll see.
And, I am not 'defending' Vas. I'm defending fair process. Produce the evidence, form your opinion based on evidence. Innocent until proven guilty.
The problem is, his statement is pure and utter nonsense. He is making _no_ distinction between "program" and "algorithm". Yes we order moves the same way, more or less. But the "how" is hugely different. For example, let's say everyone does moves in _exactly_ this order:
hash
winning captures
equal captures
killer moves.
rest of moves
how many that have written programs do this: Search hash move before generating a single move? Search killers before generating non-captures? Generate captures and non-captures separately? Generate captures and non-captures and check evasions separately? generate captures and non-captures and check-evasions and qsearch checking moves separately? How many rank captures by SEE, vs MVV/LVA? If you are in check, do you generate legal moves only, or generate pseudo-legal and exclude illegal ones by testing for in check after making the move? Or reject it by capturing the king?
The _programming_ differences are limitless. Very much like the room full of monkeys, except that each monkey is a programmer. So while the "algorithms" might look close, the programming will not. And to suggest that it will is _really_ a dishonest statement. One can find dozens of academic references on detecting plagiarism in programming, where we don't give 40,000 line projects.
This post was just so much nonsense that it is hard to believe a _real_ programmer would write such garbage. That makes him look worse than had he remained silent, in fact.
Interesting you ignore this part of his post
Vas wrote:
Generally, code theft is easy to show - just show the two sections of identical code, side-by-side. There isn't much to debate in such cases.
and choose to insult him instead.
It's put up or shut time, Bob.
Show the sections of identical code, Rybka - Fruit.
I don't know either way. Maybe they exist and maybe they don't, but I, for sure, and others probably, are not going to believe these accusations without them.
You're out of line. I'm certain interested parties are willing to do just that.
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
I am game, but this entire process will happen in the open. I'll post the list here, and Vas can answer here or on the Rybka forum. Though I would also call Norman biased of course, I think it's fair to say that you've been decidedly pro-Rybka stance throughout the discussion, so I think it's reasonable to ask to deal with Vas directly and in the public.
Well, now this thread is already getting long, so I'll start off a new thread with just questions/similarities etc.
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
Thanks for your efforts regarding Rybka. I think Rybka is clean.
Vas does not really have to say anything or show anyone his code.
Best to you,
Gerold.
Hi Gerold,
i agree, he should not and does not have to show anyone his code.
he seems interested in answering the questions, though...
people are simply requesting an explanation as to why hundreds of (identical/equivilent) lines of code appear in both fruit 2.1 and strelka 2.0.,
etc.
i think that's a fair question...
Unfortunately, based on a post of his (link given above) you are not likely to get substantive answers. Just "it is likely that if we use the same algorithm, we will produce the same code." Even though decades of academic experience spread over every university offering a computer science or programming degree says otherwise.
I see. So there's no point in putting concrete concerns with evidence to him because, according to you, you won't get a substantive answer. Your decades trll you so.
Are you actually able to generate a list of concrete concerns? For example some code similarities between Rybka and Fruit?
If not, the case against Rybka is just so much hot air.
You think he can't??
The sad part is, your defence for Vas obviously biased, (although I don't know your motives), are not helping Vasik's case. In fact the reverse is true.
Speaking of hot air...
Anyway, the FSF has to get involved.
Regardless of all this I hope things work out in the wash as I'd like to see Rybka continue to evolve, it's just too good a program to see it killed!
However, I don't want to see people breaking the GPL to get ahead as the new trend in computer programing.
Terry
I don't know if he (or others) can. We'll see.
And, I am not 'defending' Vas. I'm defending fair process. Produce the evidence, form your opinion based on evidence. Innocent until proven guilty.
Yeah, I've heard you say that several times now. Vas will be treated fairly, regardless.
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
I am game, but this entire process will happen in the open. I'll post the list here, and Vas can answer here or on the Rybka forum. Though I would also call Norman biased of course, I think it's fair to say that you've been decidedly pro-Rybka stance throughout the discussion, so I think it's reasonable to ask to deal with Vas directly and in the public.
Well, now this thread is already getting long, so I'll start off a new thread with just questions/similarities etc.
Fair enough. What you do need to do is create one list, with concerns solidly argued and backed with evidence.
I'm sorry you think I am decidely pro-Rybka, because that's not what I am, nor what I've been doing, decidedly or otherwise. I've been in meta-mode. The problem with any forum, this one included, is that it can get itself into collectively wrong mode. To prevent that it needs someone challenging assumptions, arguing against and presenting an opposite case - then you really have to prove your position rather than just get into universal agreement. Rolf was fulfilling that role, but now he's stopped and I'm doing it instead. In normal circumstances it might not matter, to be collectively wrong, but when dealing with someone elses reputation and income then a degree of caution is needed.
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
I am game, but this entire process will happen in the open. I'll post the list here, and Vas can answer here or on the Rybka forum. Though I would also call Norman biased of course, I think it's fair to say that you've been decidedly pro-Rybka stance throughout the discussion, so I think it's reasonable to ask to deal with Vas directly and in the public.
Well, now this thread is already getting long, so I'll start off a new thread with just questions/similarities etc.
Fair enough. What you do need to do is create one list, with concerns solidly argued and backed with evidence.
I'm sorry you think I am decidely pro-Rybka, because that's not what I am, nor what I've been doing, decidedly or otherwise. I've been in meta-mode. The problem with any forum, this one included, is that it can get itself into collectively wrong mode. To prevent that it needs someone challenging assumptions, arguing against and presenting an opposite case - then you really have to prove your position rather than just get into universal agreement. Rolf was fulfilling that role, but now he's stopped and I'm doing it instead. In normal circumstances it might not matter, to be collectively wrong, but when dealing with someone elses reputation and income then a degree of caution is needed.
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
I am game, but this entire process will happen in the open. I'll post the list here, and Vas can answer here or on the Rybka forum. Though I would also call Norman biased of course, I think it's fair to say that you've been decidedly pro-Rybka stance throughout the discussion, so I think it's reasonable to ask to deal with Vas directly and in the public.
Well, now this thread is already getting long, so I'll start off a new thread with just questions/similarities etc.
Fair enough. What you do need to do is create one list, with concerns solidly argued and backed with evidence.
I'm sorry you think I am decidely pro-Rybka, because that's not what I am, nor what I've been doing, decidedly or otherwise. I've been in meta-mode. The problem with any forum, this one included, is that it can get itself into collectively wrong mode. To prevent that it needs someone challenging assumptions, arguing against and presenting an opposite case - then you really have to prove your position rather than just get into universal agreement. Rolf was fulfilling that role, but now he's stopped and I'm doing it instead. In normal circumstances it might not matter, to be collectively wrong, but when dealing with someone elses reputation and income then a degree of caution is needed.
And, by all means, ask Vas direct.
Why was Rolf stopped?
He's stopped is my abreviation for:
"he has stopped", not, "he is stopped"
presumably he decided to stop posting? I have no idea, simply he appears not to be around at the moment.
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
I am game, but this entire process will happen in the open. I'll post the list here, and Vas can answer here or on the Rybka forum. Though I would also call Norman biased of course, I think it's fair to say that you've been decidedly pro-Rybka stance throughout the discussion, so I think it's reasonable to ask to deal with Vas directly and in the public.
Well, now this thread is already getting long, so I'll start off a new thread with just questions/similarities etc.
Zach,
well put. I am sure you will be fair. I agree with you that Norman might not be unbiased. I am not sure about other experts either, who have been anti-Vas or Rybka for a long time (long before this issue), whether they will be biased or not.
On the other hand, as a human it's difficult to be totally unbiased about some issues. For examle, I remember you calling Vas's statement (that Rybka 3 MP efficiency might be better than other programs) about MP efficiency BS, even though you at that time did not measure and compare the MP efficiency with Zappa, .
chrisw wrote:Vas has this to say, together with a proposal.
Rybka is and was always completely original. He is aware there are rumours about Fruit for a long time but never really understood where they are coming from. He is more than happy to try and address concrete questions or curious similarities with Fruit.
So, may I suggest you use this thread to put together a concrete and formal concern list to send to Vas. He can answer here, or here by email or on Rybkaforum or wherever.
Basically, prepare a list of concerns/question which have some suitable evidential backing, and append the evidence/data. We'll email it to him.
Christophe/Zach - do you want to put together a (small) team to do this?
I am game, but this entire process will happen in the open. I'll post the list here, and Vas can answer here or on the Rybka forum. Though I would also call Norman biased of course, I think it's fair to say that you've been decidedly pro-Rybka stance throughout the discussion, so I think it's reasonable to ask to deal with Vas directly and in the public.
Well, now this thread is already getting long, so I'll start off a new thread with just questions/similarities etc.
Fair enough. What you do need to do is create one list, with concerns solidly argued and backed with evidence.
I'm sorry you think I am decidely pro-Rybka, because that's not what I am, nor what I've been doing, decidedly or otherwise. I've been in meta-mode. The problem with any forum, this one included, is that it can get itself into collectively wrong mode. To prevent that it needs someone challenging assumptions, arguing against and presenting an opposite case - then you really have to prove your position rather than just get into universal agreement. Rolf was fulfilling that role, but now he's stopped and I'm doing it instead. In normal circumstances it might not matter, to be collectively wrong, but when dealing with someone elses reputation and income then a degree of caution is needed.
And, by all means, ask Vas direct.
Why was Rolf stopped?
He's stopped is my abreviation for:
"he has stopped", not, "he is stopped"
presumably he decided to stop posting? I have no idea, simply he appears not to be around at the moment.
chrisw wrote:Fair enough. What you do need to do is create one list, with concerns solidly argued and backed with evidence.
Well, creating one list is not exactly trivial, as evidence is still being collected. It would take quite a while to make a complete list, so I'll post most of what I have and then others can add other things. Then Vas can answer them as they come up I suppose.
I'm sorry you think I am decidely pro-Rybka, because that's not what I am, nor what I've been doing, decidedly or otherwise. I've been in meta-mode. The problem with any forum, this one included, is that it can get itself into collectively wrong mode. To prevent that it needs someone challenging assumptions, arguing against and presenting an opposite case - then you really have to prove your position rather than just get into universal agreement. Rolf was fulfilling that role, but now he's stopped and I'm doing it instead. In normal circumstances it might not matter, to be collectively wrong, but when dealing with someone elses reputation and income then a degree of caution is needed.
I agree. It's good to have someone asking questions. That's all I was referring to really--you have been consistently arguing on the side of Rybka.
.