SR
a) is a long-time moderator at rybkaforum
b) was a member of the team Rybka in several tournaments
c) Chessbase sells Rybka and earns good money with it
= articles of SR on Chessbase are most likely very biased... the fact that SR gave his biased opinions some "scientific clothes" doesn't make them less biased!
Last edited by SchachProfi on Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:37 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- As I've said before "the trial" wasn't fair, because the judge and prosecutor were effectively the same person. There was strong bias against Vasik.
- Lifetime ban was definitely an overreaction. Stripping all of the titles was perhaps an overreaction too.
Against Vasik:
- There is one thing that the article doesn't comment about and which I think is the major flaw in this defense: "semantical equivalence". Although (as the article correctly states) the ideas are nowadays freely available to everyone, still every implementation is written in a slightly different way.
The investigation report clearly showed that in places the semantics were so close to identical that this can't happen by accident.
My current view:
- I believe that Vasik copied some code snippets which broke ICGA rules.
- However the investigation wasn't neutral and Vas wasn't treated fairly.
- Final judgement wasn't fair (life-time ban)
- These kind of things are very difficult to judge fairly: For me it's clear that Vas broke ICGA rules (whether or not those rules should be changed is completely another topic). But to determine how serious punishment should be given, one need to determine how seriously the rules were broken. And there are some many different angles to this issue, that being objective (even if one wants to be) is very hard.
- As I've said before "the trial" wasn't fair, because the judge and prosecutor were effectively the same person. There was strong bias against Vasik.
- Lifetime ban was definitely an overreaction. Stripping all of the titles was perhaps an overreaction too.
Against Vasik:
- There is one thing that the article doesn't comment about and which I think is the major flaw in this defense: "semantical equivalence". Although (as the article correctly states) the ideas are nowadays freely available to everyone, still every implementation is written in a slightly different way.
The investigation report clearly showed that in places the semantics were so close to identical that this can't happen by accident.
My current view:
- I believe that Vasik copied some code snippets which broke ICGA rules.
- However the investigation wasn't neutral and Vas wasn't treated fairly.
- Final judgement wasn't fair (life-time ban)
- These kind of things are very difficult to judge fairly: For me it's clear that Vas broke ICGA rules (whether or not those rules should be changed is completely another topic). But to determine how serious punishment should be given, one need to determine how seriously the rules were broken. And there are some many different angles to this issue, that being objective (even if one wants to be) is very hard.
I agree. It just amazes me how some have turned on Vas like he is a murderer and a rapist of children. Could that mean they already had something against him before all this happened or that they are just evil people and taking pleasure in condemning someone to death for low level crimes or were deceived in the level of wrong Vas had done.
If Vas has any blame in all this, it is that he did not defend himself when all the ICGA accusations came about. I am sure that some of the evidence that he has presented to Dr. Sorin would have gone a long way to changing many opinions on the ICGA panel. That was an unfortunate decision as while it probably did not affect him personally, it did split the computer chess community in a way I never thought possible. It was a huge mistake to let Hyatt have so much sway in the ICGA proceedings as he was obviously biased against Vas, and used the opportunity to vent out his anger at Vas while using the cover of many others on the panel for legitimacy. Hyatt is simply not the guy to lead this type of investigation as he can be very hard headed in some opinions and will not sway his initial point of view even if proof against it would stare him in the face. I don't mean that in any bad way against Hyatt as I respect his accomplishments and what he has done to computer chess ... but I mean he still believes that there were WMD in Iraq but that they were never found ... to me I think he sees Vas and Rybka in the same light. While I won't get into details of computer code as it is something I wouldn't know about, I do know that there are very qualified people on both sides and they both seem to think they are 100% right in their personal opinions. Obviously somebody is wrong and somebody is right, but there is no doubt that what happened with the ICGA was blown way out of proportion and it is very clear that Vas and Rybka were scrutinized and treated in a way that was unfair.
M ANSARI wrote:Hyatt have so much sway in the ICGA proceedings.
This is a myth and totally untrue. He did not even sign the letter of complaint. Of course Vas should have defended himself and the only way the case will ever be reopened is if Vas himself contacts the ICGA.
Do you really think people of the calibur of Ken Thompson would vote Guilty just because Bob told them to? You need a reallity check.
The other great misconception is that the vote decided guilt. It did not, the entire panel process was only a reccomendation to the ICGA who were totally free to ignore the panel report if they so wished.
Harvey Williamson wrote:The other great misconception is that the vote decided guilt. It did not, the entire panel process was only a reccomendation to the ICGA who were totally free to ignore the panel report if they so wished.
That is only true in theory. In practice it was obvious that the ICGA would follow the recommendation. It is not as if David Levy were going to declare the committee wrong or out of their minds and no, these investigations are henceforth closed.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
M ANSARI wrote:Hyatt have so much sway in the ICGA proceedings.
Do you really think people of the calibur of Ken Thompson would vote Guilty just because Bob told them to? You need a reallity check.
Yes he does, he is obviously biased against Bob because Bob does not agree with his pro Vas opinion.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
Albert Silver wrote: It is not as if David Levy were going to declare the committee wrong or out of their minds and no, these investigations are henceforth closed.
yes totally closed unless vas himself wishes to enter a dialogue.
Harvey Williamson wrote:I am sure that if Vas is willing to cooperate with the ICGA the sentence can be reviewed.
I don't understand why so many intentionally ignore the fact he refused to cooperate. They expect the rules should not apply in this case.
I'm also surprised to learn from that article that different types of hardware can be used and only recently were hardware limits were imposed. I would have expected all engines would need to run on the exact same rig. Why should the person who can afford a faster computer have an advantage??
the fact that SR gave his biased opinions some "scientific clothes" doesn't make them less biased! 
