Komodo - Rybka in Danger?

[benstoker]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

[Graham Banks]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

When a newbie with 11 posts questions one of the most respected (and well informed) programmers in the field, it just about sums everything that Don says quite nicely.

[benstoker]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

When a newbie with 11 posts questions one of the most respected programmers in the field, it just about sums everything that Don says quite nicely.

That's ad hominen and hostile. I don't give a rat's #$@ who's right or wrong on this. But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim. Just speculation from biased/interested parties. What's the objective fingerprint that establishes robbo, et al. as clones?

Besides, why are you reacting so defensively to a simple question posed to the most respected programmers in the field? Why is this a personal thing? Are you saying I should ask Auntie May instead? Who else would a body ask?

The code's out there. Tell me what to look at, since you apparently know. Which file? Is this answered somewhere else in detail? Where?

Here's a list of the files:

Code: Select all

all_node.c   control.h       low_depth.c       null_move.i   Robbo_build.c      RobboLito.h         root_analysis.c  top_analysis.c  white.h
arrays.c     cut_node.c      main.c            ok_move.c     Robbo_cache.c      Robbo_mfa.c         root_multipv.c   top_node.c      win32bits.h
arrays.h     evaluation.c    Makefile          pawn_eval.c   Robbo_comp.c       Robbo_mobilita.c    root_node.c      triple3.sh      win64bits.h
benchmark.c  evaluation.v    make_move.c       pawn_eval.v   Robbo_conto.c      RobboTotalBase.h    search.c         triple4.sh      YakovChart.bi
bits.h       exclude_node.c  make_unmake.h     perft.c       Robbo_decomp.c     RobboTripleBase.h   SEE.c            triple5.sh      YakovChart.ne
black.h      functions.h     material_value.c  pv_node.c     Robbo_gen.c        RobboTripleBuild.c  set_position.c   undef.h         Zobrist.c
CHANGE_LOG   history.i       material_value.i  qsearch.c     Robbo_gen_mossa.h  RobboTriple.c       SMP.c            un_make_move.c
common.h     init_gen.i      move_gen.c        qsearch_pv.c  Robbo_glue.c       RobboTriple_iniz.c  SMP_search.c     utility.c
control.c    input.c         next_move.c       READ_THIS     Robbo_iniz.c       Robbo_utilita.c     static.c         validate.c

[michiguel]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

When a newbie with 11 posts questions one of the most respected programmers in the field, it just about sums everything that Don says quite nicely.

That's ad hominen and hostile. I don't give a rat's #$@ who's right or wrong on this. But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim.

How do you know? you just joined 4 days ago.

Miguel

Just speculation from biased/interested parties. What's the objective fingerprint that establishes robbo, et al. as clones?

Besides, why are you reacting so defensively to a simple question posed to the most respected programmers in the field? Why is this a personal thing? Are you saying I should ask Auntie May instead? Who else would a body ask?

The code's out there. Tell me what to look at, since you apparently know. Which file? Is this answered somewhere else in detail? Where?

Here's a list of the files:

Code: Select all

all_node.c   control.h       low_depth.c       null_move.i   Robbo_build.c      RobboLito.h         root_analysis.c  top_analysis.c  white.h
arrays.c     cut_node.c      main.c            ok_move.c     Robbo_cache.c      Robbo_mfa.c         root_multipv.c   top_node.c      win32bits.h
arrays.h     evaluation.c    Makefile          pawn_eval.c   Robbo_comp.c       Robbo_mobilita.c    root_node.c      triple3.sh      win64bits.h
benchmark.c  evaluation.v    make_move.c       pawn_eval.v   Robbo_conto.c      RobboTotalBase.h    search.c         triple4.sh      YakovChart.bi
bits.h       exclude_node.c  make_unmake.h     perft.c       Robbo_decomp.c     RobboTripleBase.h   SEE.c            triple5.sh      YakovChart.ne
black.h      functions.h     material_value.c  pv_node.c     Robbo_gen.c        RobboTripleBuild.c  set_position.c   undef.h         Zobrist.c
CHANGE_LOG   history.i       material_value.i  qsearch.c     Robbo_gen_mossa.h  RobboTriple.c       SMP.c            un_make_move.c
common.h     init_gen.i      move_gen.c        qsearch_pv.c  Robbo_glue.c       RobboTriple_iniz.c  SMP_search.c     utility.c
control.c    input.c         next_move.c       READ_THIS     Robbo_iniz.c       Robbo_utilita.c     static.c         validate.c

[benstoker]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

When a newbie with 11 posts questions one of the most respected programmers in the field, it just about sums everything that Don says quite nicely.

That's ad hominen and hostile. I don't give a rat's #$@ who's right or wrong on this. But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim.

How do you know? you just joined 4 days ago.

Miguel

Just speculation from biased/interested parties. What's the objective fingerprint that establishes robbo, et al. as clones?

Besides, why are you reacting so defensively to a simple question posed to the most respected programmers in the field? Why is this a personal thing? Are you saying I should ask Auntie May instead? Who else would a body ask?

The code's out there. Tell me what to look at, since you apparently know. Which file? Is this answered somewhere else in detail? Where?

Here's a list of the files:

Code: Select all

all_node.c   control.h       low_depth.c       null_move.i   Robbo_build.c      RobboLito.h         root_analysis.c  top_analysis.c  white.h
arrays.c     cut_node.c      main.c            ok_move.c     Robbo_cache.c      Robbo_mfa.c         root_multipv.c   top_node.c      win32bits.h
arrays.h     evaluation.c    Makefile          pawn_eval.c   Robbo_comp.c       Robbo_mobilita.c    root_node.c      triple3.sh      win64bits.h
benchmark.c  evaluation.v    make_move.c       pawn_eval.v   Robbo_conto.c      RobboTotalBase.h    search.c         triple4.sh      YakovChart.bi
bits.h       exclude_node.c  make_unmake.h     perft.c       Robbo_decomp.c     RobboTripleBase.h   SEE.c            triple5.sh      YakovChart.ne
black.h      functions.h     material_value.c  pv_node.c     Robbo_gen.c        RobboTripleBuild.c  set_position.c   undef.h         Zobrist.c
CHANGE_LOG   history.i       material_value.i  qsearch.c     Robbo_gen_mossa.h  RobboTriple.c       SMP.c            un_make_move.c
common.h     init_gen.i      move_gen.c        qsearch_pv.c  Robbo_glue.c       RobboTriple_iniz.c  SMP_search.c     utility.c
control.c    input.c         next_move.c       READ_THIS     Robbo_iniz.c       Robbo_utilita.c     static.c         validate.c

And very nice to meet you too.

Well, I guess I don't know and you do know, but you ain't gonna tell, right? Whassup wid de attitude about the robbo deal? If I am wasting your time because this is asked and answered elsewhere on the forum, can you at least say that much? That's the usu. way it works on internet forums. Some newbie comes along and asks a question that's already answered. The response is almost always a link to where the answer can be found or some specific info on how to locate the the responsive thread already on the forum. But, I have never ever ever received this kind of treatment on a technical forum. This that's-the-way-it-is-and-how-dare-you-ask-why-you-little-peon.

So, Miguel, please kindly point me to the thread or at least tell me it is answered somewhere on this forum or give me the name of the thread.

Thank you

Ben

[Don]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

It's almost completely ridiculous to even dignify this with a discussion. If you want to, we can argue about whether the earth is flat or not. I can present the evidence that it is not flat and you can reject it and you can get the same emotional satisfaction.

So anything I say in addition to what I have already said would make it seem like it was worthy of debate when it isn't.

And suppose we actually settled the issue and come to an agreement? Where would you go with that? Do you intend to build this into some kind of cause?

[michiguel]

Well, this stuff was made public by the clones, and anyway Vas had asked me to keep such general eval knowledge confidential for a year, and it's now been a year and a half. Still I won't reveal exact values of terms in R3 even if they are more or less public due to the clones (or "derivatives" if you prefer). I doubt that they would be of much use to a non-clone program anyway, as different programs require different values for terms.

I would like to know something:
1. If only you and Vas had the Rybka 3 code, how did the "cloners" managed to get it ?
2. If Rybka's code is alredy "stealed", why you and Vas don't present evidences that the "cloners" code and the Rybka 3 one is the same?

For what reason should they do this? Every reasonable person already knows that these "clones" are based on Rybka, and whoever is left is not going to be convinced no matter what additional evidence is presented.

I know from my own dealings with people that if someone really want to believe something, no amount of evidence or logic is going to change them.

Make the case.

When a newbie with 11 posts questions one of the most respected programmers in the field, it just about sums everything that Don says quite nicely.

That's ad hominen and hostile. I don't give a rat's #$@ who's right or wrong on this. But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim.

How do you know? you just joined 4 days ago.

Miguel

Just speculation from biased/interested parties. What's the objective fingerprint that establishes robbo, et al. as clones?

Besides, why are you reacting so defensively to a simple question posed to the most respected programmers in the field? Why is this a personal thing? Are you saying I should ask Auntie May instead? Who else would a body ask?

The code's out there. Tell me what to look at, since you apparently know. Which file? Is this answered somewhere else in detail? Where?

Here's a list of the files:

Code: Select all

all_node.c   control.h       low_depth.c       null_move.i   Robbo_build.c      RobboLito.h         root_analysis.c  top_analysis.c  white.h
arrays.c     cut_node.c      main.c            ok_move.c     Robbo_cache.c      Robbo_mfa.c         root_multipv.c   top_node.c      win32bits.h
arrays.h     evaluation.c    Makefile          pawn_eval.c   Robbo_comp.c       Robbo_mobilita.c    root_node.c      triple3.sh      win64bits.h
benchmark.c  evaluation.v    make_move.c       pawn_eval.v   Robbo_conto.c      RobboTotalBase.h    search.c         triple4.sh      YakovChart.bi
bits.h       exclude_node.c  make_unmake.h     perft.c       Robbo_decomp.c     RobboTripleBase.h   SEE.c            triple5.sh      YakovChart.ne
black.h      functions.h     material_value.c  pv_node.c     Robbo_gen.c        RobboTripleBuild.c  set_position.c   undef.h         Zobrist.c
CHANGE_LOG   history.i       material_value.i  qsearch.c     Robbo_gen_mossa.h  RobboTriple.c       SMP.c            un_make_move.c
common.h     init_gen.i      move_gen.c        qsearch_pv.c  Robbo_glue.c       RobboTriple_iniz.c  SMP_search.c     utility.c
control.c    input.c         next_move.c       READ_THIS     Robbo_iniz.c       Robbo_utilita.c     static.c         validate.c

And very nice to meet you too.

Well, I guess I don't know and you do know, but you ain't gonna tell, right? Whassup wid de attitude about the robbo deal? If I am wasting your time because this is asked and answered elsewhere on the forum, can you at least say that much? That's the usu. way it works on internet forums. Some newbie comes along and asks a question that's already answered. The response is almost always a link to where the answer can be found or some specific info on how to locate the the responsive thread already on the forum. But, I have never ever ever received this kind of treatment on a technical forum. This that's-the-way-it-is-and-how-dare-you-ask-why-you-little-peon.

So, Miguel, please kindly point me to the thread or at least tell me it is answered somewhere on this forum or give me the name of the thread.

Thank you

Ben

"But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim. Just speculation from biased/interested parties"

Does not look like a question to me, looks like you came with your opinion already set. That is why I asked why you were so sure. If you are interested in the discussion, search for Gian-Carlo Pascutto for a comparison between Ippo and R3 dissassembled or Conkie, when he found similarities in tables between Ippolit and Rybka.

Then you say
"But, I have never ever ever received this kind of treatment on a technical forum."

I do not know why you are playing the victim role.

Miguel

[Don]

"But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim. Just speculation from biased/interested parties"

Does not look like a question to me, looks like you came with your opinion already set. That is why I asked why you were so sure. If you are interested in the discussion, search for Gian-Carlo Pascutto for a comparison between Ippo and R3 dissassembled or Conkie, when he found similarities in tables between Ippolit and Rybka.

You are letting them suck you into this conversation and it's going nowhere. No fact you present is going to change their mind. It's kind of like the people who think the moon landing was faked, they can always say, "were you actually there on the moon with them?" These guys are kooks so just leave them alone. I don't know if they are as kooky as the moon landing guys, but they seem to be emotionally vested in believing a certain way.

[benstoker]

"But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim. Just speculation from biased/interested parties"

Does not look like a question to me, looks like you came with your opinion already set. That is why I asked why you were so sure. If you are interested in the discussion, search for Gian-Carlo Pascutto for a comparison between Ippo and R3 dissassembled or Conkie, when he found similarities in tables between Ippolit and Rybka.

You are letting them suck you into this conversation and it's going nowhere. No fact you present is going to change their mind. It's kind of like the people who think the moon landing was faked, they can always say, "were you actually there on the moon with them?" These guys are kooks so just leave them alone. I don't know if they are as kooky as the moon landing guys, but they seem to be emotionally vested in believing a certain way.

I am among the 'they' now? Responding once again with ridicule? Why? I don't care if it is a clone or not. If it's theft of intellectual property, then I would hope the Rybka principals determine who did it and prosecute civil and criminal claims against the thieves.

Certainly we can agree that anybody responsible in whole or in part for theft of Rybka's intellectual property must be prosecuted. And, likewise, we can agree that the unlawful, unauthorized release or exposure of Rybka's proprietary intellectual property to the public cannot and does not provide legal cover to any one who would thereafter turn a profit by misappropriating the property and incorporating the technology in their own closed-source commercial product in competition with Rybka.

Thus, the consequences are potentially severe for not only the perpetrators of the alleged crime, but all who would attempt to profit from the alleged criminal act of theft.

Microsoft's source code for Win2000 was dumped on the internet a few years ago illegally. That didn't mean people could make use of the code and start selling their own Win2000++ competing product.

Thus, I reiterate my question. Where has can one find a detailed discussion that establishes the basis in fact for the clone claims?

It really must get resolved, because even open source programmers must be wary of including proprietary i.p. in their applications. The whole software industry is riddled with i.p. issues. Witness MP3, h.264, aac, various compression and encryption algorithms, etc.

I resent your characterizing the inquiry as kookoo. Now, have you yourself implemented any of the revealed Rybka ideas into your engine?

[benstoker]

"But, there's been no detailed basis or analysis presented to firmly establish the claim. Just speculation from biased/interested parties"

Does not look like a question to me, looks like you came with your opinion already set. That is why I asked why you were so sure. If you are interested in the discussion, search for Gian-Carlo Pascutto for a comparison between Ippo and R3 dissassembled or Conkie, when he found similarities in tables between Ippolit and Rybka.

Then you say
"But, I have never ever ever received this kind of treatment on a technical forum."

I do not know why you are playing the victim role.

Miguel

Thanks for the reference. I'll go look ...