The Computer Chess Community

[Stan Arts]

You tell us the computer chess community is small, unknown, cold and mean. You then tell us we should not care about computer chess and especially not about the people behind it. Because chess players do not care etc.

Not easy to further reduce such argumentation to absurdity.

You selectively and conveniently find it very difficult to understand cloning, cloned engines, people's achievements and legal rights. Because as you expressed before, piracy is great! If anything can be pirated do it! It's simply the author's faillure to protect it. We have no responsibility. Let lawsuits solve it. Yet find it surprisingly easy to understand whatever else goes on here. Cool.

[BrendanJNorman]

You tell us the computer chess community is small, unknown, cold and mean. You then tell us we should not care about computer chess and especially not about the people behind it. Because chess players do not care etc.

Not easy to further reduce such argumentation to absurdity.

You selectively and conveniently find it very difficult to understand cloning, cloned engines, people's achievements and legal rights. Because as you expressed before, piracy is great! If anything can be pirated do it! It's simply the author's faillure to protect it. We have no responsibility. Let lawsuits solve it. Yet find it surprisingly easy to understand whatever else goes on here. Cool.

Stan, man this is high school level argumentation.

Are these silly straw-man tactics your goto strategy for any discussion?

I said none of the things that you said that I said and any semi-intelligent person reading knows you've heavily distorted my initial assertion in the attempt to build a solid foundation to support your previous deception.

Rather than what you're doing (which is deliberately misrepresenting another's position in a dishonest way), try to be objective.

Its ridiculous to write some complete nonsense, which is nothing to do what what I'd originally said, and then say "Not easy to further reduce such argumentation to absurdity. "

[Stan Arts]

Stan, man this is high school level argumentation.

I said none of the things that you said that I said

Elementary school now. A fine respectful gentleman that stands for his actions and words.

[BrendanJNorman]

Hi All,

blabla...

blah blah blah...look ugly as hell and make long text unreadable.

http://rwbc-chess.de

We both know I didn't "try to defend" Synapze.

Drop the B.S, you liar.

My assertion was that if you guys still use Houdini, Strelka, Fire, Rybka and whatever other "controversial" engines (i.e that have been accused of some form of cloning), and don't make the rules clear, you're in no position to judge others for testing an engine the "crowd" might not like.

What's got you so bitter anyway, Guenther?

What gives you the urge to insult others and cause friction?

I could take a few guesses, but we'll save that for now...

[BrendanJNorman]

Stan, man this is high school level argumentation.

I said none of the things that you said that I said

Elementary school now. A fine respectful gentleman that stands for his actions and words.

Look here bud, it's simple...

If you're going to quote somebody, quote them directly.

Don't make your own completely flawed deductions based on what I said, and then quote your deductions, rather than the words spoken.

We both know you misquoted me deliberately, so don't play dumb.

I live in China dude, what you're doing is kindergarten-level manipulation...not sophisticated at all.

Just be honest if you want to make a point.

[hgm]

Well, you said this:

Our friend from India is speaking from the perspective of an engine USER, rather than that of a programmer.

From the perspective of the user, it doesn't matter the origin of the engine, as long as it it either strong, or plays in an attractive way.

As a response to the remark that someone didn't care whether Synapse was pirated software, as long as it was useful to him, I can understand why some people take it to mean that you consider 'theft' just a matter of 'perspective', which should only concern the people who are stolen from, and not those who could possibly benefit from it.

[BrendanJNorman]

Well, you said this:

Our friend from India is speaking from the perspective of an engine USER, rather than that of a programmer.

From the perspective of the user, it doesn't matter the origin of the engine, as long as it it either strong, or plays in an attractive way.

As a response to the remark that someone didn't care whether Synapse was pirated software, as long as he could use it, I can understand why some people take it to mean that you consider 'theft' just a matter of 'perspective', which should only concern the people who are stolen from, and not those who could possibly benefit from it.

Okay, firstly thanks for quoting me directly and behaving in a civilized way.

Let me address a few points...

1. "Our friend from India" was a form of politeness, not necessarily implying agreement/alignment with any position that the person holds. Not distancing myself either, just a form of politeness.

2. My answer was an attempt to be as objective as possible. And I think everything I said IS true. Most engine users who have no background in programming and who are not, for example, a member of the talkchess forum, have no idea, nor do they care about this whole war of the clones and witch-hunting that seems to go along with it.

3. Sometimes when quoting somebody, we need to be careful not to cherry-pick isolated sentences which may lose context when plucked out of it's respective paragraph. I also said shortly after "This difference in paradigm is often the root of disagreement on this forum and even myself, I speak from the perspective of the user, despite understanding the concerns of the programmers." - None of my attackers have mentioned that I said this particular sentence. Does the truth hurt? I can't speak from the perspective of a programmer and am thus forced to speak from the perspective of an engine user. I expressed a disappointment with the phenomenon (which is plain as day) that new engines, if strong, are guilty until proven innocent when it comes to stealing code, while on the other hand, 90% of the top engines have "borrowed" from each other. Anyway, this leads to...

4. Read for meaning. I understand that a lot of members don't speak English as their first language, but it's a matter of diplomacy to read a person's words in their entirety and take time to deduce meaning, rather than cherry-picking isolated sentences and becoming emotional.

If I cherry-picked sentences from the Mandarin I hear on a daily basis here in China, I'd be angry all day. Instead, it's necessary to pay attention and deduce overall meaning from the whole.

Where is the bottom line when it comes to stealing other's property when it comes to code? This is my fundamental question.

-Houdini started as Robolitto

-Rybka started as Fruit

-About 10 engines started as Ippo

So if this Synapse stole RE'd Houdini, what does this mean? It's like a engine Frankenstein? And how many engines also have internal organs from others?

You can't enforce a moral code on others without making the rules consistent and clear.

What's obvious to you, might not be obvious to others and this doesn't give you a right to insult them.

I think I made myself pretty clear.

[chetday]

Brendan, don't worry. We are all here due to almost psychiatric reasons, aside being nerds and socially useless persons. The fact that not a single female posts here shows us our real value. Take it easy.

Kai, I always enjoy your posts, but I have to admit this one is now at the top of my enjoyment list. In fact, I'm still wiping spit off my monitor from when I first read it. Thank you for another brilliant insight!

Brendan, I thoroughly enjoy your posts too and have learned a lot from reading your thoughts about chess engines and how to adjust the various parameters to mimic some of the great masters' methods of play.

For what it's worth, I've been on the internet since 1986 (was manager of the Apple II roundtable and later for a brief time managed the religion roundtable on GEnie back in the day) and I've pretty much seen it all in terms of trolls and idiots as well as compadres and friends. Though I occasionally enjoy a blazing flame war, I haven't indulged myself by participating in one for many years and will resist the temptation right now to prod a fool or two in this thread... sure am tempted, though.

In any event, Brendan, instead of continuing to respond to guys pushing various buttons to see which ones aggravate you the most, I hope you'll just let the trolls wander back under their bridges and spend your valuable time writing about engines and parameters and chess strategy and tactics.

And Kai, your comment about the lack of females here on TalkChess motivates me to pass on a rumor I recently heard about a well-known political commentator, writer, and celebrity in Chile (as well as serious chess player) who apparently is giving consideration to a gender change operation. If this should occur, then perhaps we'll finally have a witty gal to swap spit with in various topics. Hope does indeed spring eternal.

[hgm]

Although I certainly think you have a point that most engine users are unaware of the legal status of most engine, it was a bit unlucky you tried to make this point in the context of Synapse, which seems to be one of the most blatant examples of criminal software piracy. As I understand from people who have examined it, there is no reverse enginering involved here, just plain copying and relabeling, by people that have made a habit of this. They are like a second-hand car dealer that only offers stolen cars on which he slammed new number plates.

You argue the 'Computer Chess Community' is harsh and uncivilized in their judgement (to summarize your long original post in my own words), but I think you could expect similar responses on a forum for car buyers, when in response to someone that had stated "I don't care if the car I buy is stolen, as long as it has comfortable seats and does many miles to the gallon", you would suggest that this is an acceptable attitude from the perspective of a car buyer. Especially if many of the prople on that forum were looking for a car because their previous one had just been stolen.

Buying from a known fence is something entirely different from buying products from manufacturers that are involved in litigation on alleged infrigement of each other's patents. And there is no harm in warning people against known fences, to prevent them from unwittingly supporting crime.

[Guenther]

Hi All,

blabla...

blah blah blah...look ugly as hell and make long text unreadable.

http://rwbc-chess.de

(Well, that was just a friendly hint. Of course I didn't know that you cannot differentiate between a simple CSS property 'line height' and a double line break in a simple text on a board/blog, or what was the reason to include one of my sites?)

We both know I didn't "try to defend" Synapze.

Of course you did. Everyone can read it.

Drop the B.S, you liar.

My assertion was that if you guys still use Houdini, Strelka, Fire, Rybka and whatever other "controversial" engines (i.e that have been accused of some form of cloning), and don't make the rules clear, you're in no position to judge others for testing an engine the "crowd" might not like.

What gives you the urge to insult others and cause friction?

You are the only one insulting, which can be seen above. (sigh)
The only friction I find at all is with people of a certain category.
BTW who is 'you' in the above quote 'if you guys still use...'?
It really seems you are confused and it makes absolutely no sense to trie to argue with you...

I have to play a (real) tennis match now, bye.