In this bit from the article Graham linked to, who is the third person? Is it Soren Riis, and does he post on the Rybka forum as SR?
yes he is a moderator on the Rybka forum,
Hello Harvey,
So, with the exception of Dr. Miguel A. Ballicora, whom I would accept as an expert and a distinguished engine author without argument, the document cites a Rybka forum moderator and George Speight as persons who, and I quote,
can rely upon a vast expertise in the field of chess programming, law and mathematical logic
.
It also cites Ed Schröder whom I also accept as an expert and a distinguished engine author, but not other experts who changed their minds from supporting Vas to the other way once the evidence was in.
I mean, why do that? Admit the engine of your choice but the stated rationale in that document is difficult to digest without laughter.
In this bit from the article Graham linked to, who is the third person? Is it Soren Riis, and does he post on the Rybka forum as SR?
yes he is a moderator on the Rybka forum,
Hello Harvey,
So, with the exception of Dr. Miguel A. Ballicora, whom I would accept as an expert and a distinguished engine author without argument, the document cites a Rybka forum moderator and George Speight as persons who, and I quote,
can rely upon a vast expertise in the field of chess programming, law and mathematical logic
.
It also cites Ed Schröder whom I also accept as an expert and a distinguished engine author, but not other experts who changed their minds from supporting Vas to the other way once the evidence was in.
I mean, why do that? Admit the engine of your choice but the stated rationale in that document is difficult to digest without laughter.
marcelk wrote:
For me it is time to focus more on my long-term engine plans (esp. autonomous knowledge synthesis)
Ahhh the holy grail of computer chess! If you figure that out please let me know. I think many of us have toyed with that at one time or another.
Open a new thread and tell us your thoughts on "autonomous knowledge synthesis", maybe we can brainstorm this in the forum (instead of obsessive over what happens to Vas.)
that works so well in my current engine but that is also quite easy to decouple from chess if needed.
Steve B wrote:Well it's their party(tournament) and they can cry if they want to(make whatever rules they want to bar certain programs while allowing others)
isn't there a fairly long list of distinguished engine authors that will not participate in the Leiden tournaments even before this turn around of theirs?
Hiarcs and Junior i know of already..now Baron..any others?
anyone have a complete up-to-date list ?
will they be able to use pirated copies of these engines anyway and enter them in the tournament and operate them ?
(which they seem to be comfortable doing in on-line events from what i know)
Curious Regards
Steve
I have mailed them this morning that I won't enter CSVN tournaments anymore. I have played 5 or 6 times from 1993 to 2011 with 3 completely rewritten engines (or 4 depending on how you count), but now their board has gone completely banana-republic and they have lost my respect for their integrity.
In the current composition that board can not continue their function but that is something for the members to resolve. I wasn't a member anymore since the years I happened to work abroad. Actually last year was I seriously considering to rejoin and become active, but at that exact time the pirating of Junior by their chairman became evident, so I decided to wait a bit, not expecting their unprecedented abysmal handling of it in the aftermath. My moderate regret is that I don't have the privilege of canceling my membership now.
Live goes on. Let the dishonest programmers have it their way with their stolen wares and if the chess players are content with that so be it. For me it is time to focus more on my long-term engine plans (esp. autonomous knowledge synthesis) that works so well in my current engine but that is also quite easy to decouple from chess if needed. (But I will continue to use chess as main problem domain as long as there are honorable tournaments to go to.)
PS: Note that I'm not claiming to be among "distinguished engine authors" of course, far from that.
Hi Marcel
it is clear from your post that you are quite distinguished indeed
Best Regards
Steve
In this bit from the article Graham linked to, who is the third person? Is it Soren Riis, and does he post on the Rybka forum as SR?
yes he is a moderator on the Rybka forum,
Hello Harvey,
So, with the exception of Dr. Miguel A. Ballicora, whom I would accept as an expert and a distinguished engine author without argument, the document cites a Rybka forum moderator and George Speight as persons who, and I quote,
can rely upon a vast expertise in the field of chess programming, law and mathematical logic
.
It also cites Ed Schröder whom I also accept as an expert and a distinguished engine author, but not other experts who changed their minds from supporting Vas to the other way once the evidence was in.
I mean, why do that? Admit the engine of your choice but the stated rationale in that document is difficult to digest without laughter.
Later.
Hi Roger,
I think your post is a fair summary.
Ciao,
Harvey
One other bit to add. It cites "several programmers that suddenly changed their mind". I saw a couple of "those programmers" that stated that it took multiple years of seeing the evidence before they changed their minds. It wasn't like it happened over a weekend.
