could somebody please explain why reverse engineering wrong

[CRoberson]

Not really. He could decompile and recompile. In that case, all would be in one source file. Hmm, that is exactly what IPPO is - all one source file.
Nobody writes that much code in one source file especially when it is a group of people working together simultaneously.

But also nobody would then remove such important features like e.g. multiPV or SMP support - what sense should that make?

PS, I forgot one more: EGTB support.

That is simple. They do that to hide the fact that they cloned.

[parrish]

i have been thinking about ths lately, and i am not even sure why reverse engineering an engine (in this case) is so wrong. when something comes along that is such an improvement on its predecessors it seems only natural to me that people would want to figure out how it is working, and to look to make improvements on said engine. is this not the basis of all technological advancements?

i have been thinking about this lately, and i am not even sure why stealing money (in this case) is so wrong. when someone comes along who is so much richer than other people it seems only natural to me that people would want take all his money, and to look to make more out of it. is this not the basis of all respectable entrepreneurship?

vp

Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor.

[slobo]

Not really. He could decompile and recompile. In that case, all would be in one source file. Hmm, that is exactly what IPPO is - all one source file.
Nobody writes that much code in one source file especially when it is a group of people working together simultaneously.

But also nobody would then remove such important features like e.g. multiPV or SMP support - what sense should that make?

PS, I forgot one more: EGTB support.

That is simple. They do that to hide the fact that they cloned.

If "that is simple", as you said, the simplest way to demonstrate this would be to provide a direct evidence from Rybka.

Without such an evidence, all you talk is a simple defamation.
Do you understand this?

[F.Huber]

That is simple. They do that to hide the fact that they cloned.

You don't really believe such an absurd argument yourself, do you?

[Dirt]

It would be illegal ONLY if a court find out (conclude) that what it is distributed is exactly the same as the original source.

It doesn't have to be exactly the same. If the court decides they are too similar to believe they were independently developed then it could be ruled a copyright violation.

[michiguel]

Not really. He could decompile and recompile. In that case, all would be in one source file. Hmm, that is exactly what IPPO is - all one source file.
Nobody writes that much code in one source file especially when it is a group of people working together simultaneously.

But also nobody would then remove such important features like e.g. multiPV or SMP support - what sense should that make?

PS, I forgot one more: EGTB support.

Maybe it was RE what they could, rather than the whole program removing parts of it.
If you are trying to RE a strong engine, once you figure out search() and eval(), which is the core of the program strength, you leave the rest of the mess out. Since you ask about sense, did you wonder why such a strong engine showed up with stability problems, time management issues, and no pondering?

Miguel

[Damir]

The same could be asked about Rybka, the first time it entered the chess scene.

[alpha123]

Not really. He could decompile and recompile. In that case, all would be in one source file. Hmm, that is exactly what IPPO is - all one source file.
Nobody writes that much code in one source file especially when it is a group of people working together simultaneously.

But also nobody would then remove such important features like e.g. multiPV or SMP support - what sense should that make?

PS, I forgot one more: EGTB support.

Maybe it was RE what they could, rather than the whole program removing parts of it.
If you are trying to RE a strong engine, once you figure out search() and eval(), which is the core of the program strength, you leave the rest of the mess out. Since you ask about sense, did you wonder why such a strong engine showed up with stability problems, time management issues, and no pondering?

Miguel

The author(s) cared about strength, not stability and features.

Peter

[CRoberson]

Not really. He could decompile and recompile. In that case, all would be in one source file. Hmm, that is exactly what IPPO is - all one source file.
Nobody writes that much code in one source file especially when it is a group of people working together simultaneously.

But also nobody would then remove such important features like e.g. multiPV or SMP support - what sense should that make?

PS, I forgot one more: EGTB support.

Maybe it was RE what they could, rather than the whole program removing parts of it.
If you are trying to RE a strong engine, once you figure out search() and eval(), which is the core of the program strength, you leave the rest of the mess out. Since you ask about sense, did you wonder why such a strong engine showed up with stability problems, time management issues, and no pondering?

Miguel

The author(s) cared about strength, not stability and features.

Peter

You can't have a strong chess program without being able to test it. Stability gives you the ability to test it. So, a program that is strong
but could not be tested during development could not get that strong on its own without some sort of external source to copy.

[michiguel]

Not really. He could decompile and recompile. In that case, all would be in one source file. Hmm, that is exactly what IPPO is - all one source file.
Nobody writes that much code in one source file especially when it is a group of people working together simultaneously.

But also nobody would then remove such important features like e.g. multiPV or SMP support - what sense should that make?

PS, I forgot one more: EGTB support.

Maybe it was RE what they could, rather than the whole program removing parts of it.
If you are trying to RE a strong engine, once you figure out search() and eval(), which is the core of the program strength, you leave the rest of the mess out. Since you ask about sense, did you wonder why such a strong engine showed up with stability problems, time management issues, and no pondering?

Miguel

The author(s) cared about strength, not stability and features.

Peter

Like the Brooklyn bridge.

Miguel