Diep 2.0

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Dann Corbit, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Evert
Posts: 2929
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:42 pm
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by Evert » Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:53 am

Dirt wrote:
Evert wrote:As an aside: from what I remember, there have been cases where failure to defend a copyright has lead to judges ruling that the copyright is now void.
I think that was under common law jurisdiction (in the US), and it's not clear to me how that would translate to other parts of the world. International copyright laws are a bit of a mess anyway.
I've never heard of that. Trademarks have to be defended but I don't think copyrights do.
You know what? I think I may have mixed those up. I'll try to find the case I was thinking of.

EDIT: I can't find where I got that from, but reading up on it, you're certainly correct. You don't need to defend a copyright. In fact, you can let people copy your work for quite a while, and the sue the whole lot of them.
Last edited by Evert on Sun Jan 28, 2018 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

syzygy
Posts: 5000
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:56 pm

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by syzygy » Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:53 am

Evert wrote:
hgm wrote:Things are of course exactly as Ronald says; copyright expires only a long time after someone's death, and the fact that you can get away with a crime unpunished, and others actually do just that, doesn't make it anything less of a crime.
As an aside: from what I remember, there have been cases where failure to defend a copyright has lead to judges ruling that the copyright is now void.
You are probably thinking of a trademark case.

Trademarks lose their protected status if they become synonymous with the class of products or services they are used for. Escalator used to be a trademark, but the company owning it lost it when the word escalator became the general term for moving stairways.

Copyrights don't expire before their time is over. (But if the copyright holder sits still too long after learning of an infringement, he might lose the right to act against that particular infringement.)

Edit: obviously I failed to read the further messages in this thread :-)

Adam Hair
Posts: 3226
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 8:31 pm
Location: Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by Adam Hair » Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:39 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote:
Rebel wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:
hgm wrote:
syzygy wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:Have the owners of Houdini, Komodo etc taken ANYONE to court over it?
Oh my...

You believe that something illegal becomes legal when people go unpunished.
You believe that valid copyrights somehow cease to exist when they are being violated.

Believe what you want, but that does not make it true.

But I do hope that the moderators here take action to stop the propagation of your lies on this senstivie topic.
Well, earlier postings of this guy have revealed he considers himself above the law in any case, because he is living in China, beyond the reach of any western law enforcement. And we all know how much respect for copyright exists in China.

I am not sure what my task as moderator is in this. If people want to confess their criminal tendencies, it is not really against the charter.

Things are of course exactly as Ronald says; copyright expires only a long time after someone's death, and the fact that you can get away with a crime unpunished, and others actually do just that, doesn't make it anything less of a crime.

So for now I will leave it at a warning to all readers that they should not be fooled by pleas to engage in thievery.
Another Dutch guy runs in to defend the cause - this is like clockwork. :lol:

And he also puts words into my mouth, rather than trying to understand what my assertion truly was.

Above the law? Beyond the reach of Western law enforcement?

:roll:

If you are racist toward Chinese, that's one thing (it's common for you guys, I've noticed), but don't pretend you understand why I am not.

I shared a link of an engine which I still had on a ten year old HDD, and when I realized that the author didn't approve, I took it down.

This is the reality of what happened.

Any honest person reading can see this clearly.

The rest is Dutch guys creating straw-man, revealing their racism and trying to twist my words...

...which were nothing more than queries to the community - not my common practice.

If you want to preach about piracy, go over to immortal and do it.

Many of your members are already there.
But in this case the Dutch miraculously stand together united :lol:

Copyright is copyright.
Of course Ed, but you're standing together against a strawman they created themselves.

Never once did I say that I condone copyright infringement or sharing of Vincent's engine.

1. Wouldn't I have left the link active if I didn't care about Vincent's feelings on the matter?

2. Wouldn't I also share it with the thousands of guys on my mailing list?

3. Wouldn't I have a history of doing such things given my rather large audience, who would be hungry for such sharing?

Yes, Yes and Yes.
Perhaps you could clarify your position since you feel that it has been misrepresented. I must say that it appeared in some of your posts that you do not have much respect for copyright. Yes, you respected Vincent's wishes and deactivated the download. But in your questioning the practicality of engine authors enforcing their copyright you gave the impression that you do not think copyright is something to be respected. If this is not your position then you have been misunderstood by multiple people.
BrendanJNorman wrote: Your compatriots in their most "gentlemanly" manner, deliberately misrepresented what I'd asserted, insulted a racial group (Chinese), insulted engine testers (calling them "idiots") and insulted me personally - all within the single thread.
1) I don't think that there has been a deliberate misrepresentation since it is not clear what your position is.

2) I believe that if any racial groups or nationalities have been insulted in this thread, you have to include yourself in the list of offenders.

3) Vincent doesn't save his insults for just engine testers.

4) With the exception of Vincent, the insults started with the term "virtue-signaling". That was a misrepresentation of why moderation did what it did.
BrendanJNorman wrote: If they'd read my words for meaning and comprehension (or if they were not so disingenuous) it's absolutely obvious that what I was questioning was the apparent double-standards that exist on this forum.

Not whether copyright infringement is or isn't justified.

None of these guys say a word at the numerous "forums" around the web (which we all know about) where Diep has been illegally downloaded for YEARS (going by past threads I just checked), as well as Komodo, Houdini, and even your work Ed.
Perhaps it is because they do not go to those forums due to a lack of topics/subject matter that they are interested in? Would their opinion on this topic matter at those forums anyway?
BrendanJNorman wrote: They only swoop down like vultures in the safe swamp that is TalkChess forum - somewhere they have complete control.

They swoop down in a meaningless thread where I mistakenly shared a 20 year old engine (thinking there's no harm in it), then quickly retracted it (when learning of the author's feelings).
Is this really your perception of what occurred?
BrendanJNorman wrote: Hostile, grumpy old men like this are the reason there is so little interest in computer chess from the wider chess market.{/quote]

That certainly could be a reason for it :lol:
BrendanJNorman wrote: I myself know people VERY interested in engines, who came to TalkChess as a guest and within 20 minutes or so of reading thought "forget this garbage".

They've told me about this.

All they seen was narrow-minded, arrogant guys bullying others.
I know of many people myself. I also know that a large subset are interested solely in what entertainment they can derive from the chess engines. A majority of those people have no interest in what it takes to create an engine, nor do they care much about the people who do the creating. Given that CCC is where a significant proportion of engine authors interact with end-users, there will be turbulence when someone acts in ways that are disrespectful to the authors.
BrendanJNorman wrote: I am doing more myself to convert the average chess player into a computer chess enthusiast - in the 2 years my site has been up - than some of these guys have in 20 years of releasing their engines to a tiny group of "testers".
That's great! But quite honestly, many authors are simply combining two interests or abilities that they have - programming and chess - into one project. It has not been their goal to create a wider audience.
BrendanJNorman wrote: There are thousands of average chessplayers reading computer chess articles, challenging chess engines and otherwise embracing our hobby - because of me.
Again, that is great. I am not sure of its relevance in this discussion, but I am glad that your website is popular.

BrendanJNorman wrote: This guy refused to release his engine (even for a price!), and this is fine, but calling his fans "idiots" is morally worse than my sharing the engine.
No one has written a cross word to you at all for sharing the engine, not even Vincent. It was the subsequent posts that created the appearance you do not have much respect for copyright which created the responses.

BrendanJNorman wrote: Judging my character based on the country I live in is called racism - another very sensitive word these days, but applicable in this case.
That did not occur. And a misuse of the term "racism".

BrendanJNorman wrote: There was never a strong opposition to his copyright claim from me - you can all see this once free from your very clear cognitive biases.
The problem for some was not the strength of your opposition, but that it existed.

BrendanJNorman wrote: Last night I received an email from a well-wisher (not a TC member) who, having read this thread, urged me to leave this heavily polluted forum - which is what I will do.

P.S. None of this is against you Ed, who I have admired for years already.
Hopefully you will not leave. You share interesting content at CCC.

BrendanJNorman
Posts: 2360
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 11:43 pm
Full name: Brendan J Norman

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by BrendanJNorman » Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:48 pm

Adam Hair wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:
Rebel wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:
hgm wrote:
syzygy wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:Have the owners of Houdini, Komodo etc taken ANYONE to court over it?
Oh my...

You believe that something illegal becomes legal when people go unpunished.
You believe that valid copyrights somehow cease to exist when they are being violated.

Believe what you want, but that does not make it true.

But I do hope that the moderators here take action to stop the propagation of your lies on this senstivie topic.
Well, earlier postings of this guy have revealed he considers himself above the law in any case, because he is living in China, beyond the reach of any western law enforcement. And we all know how much respect for copyright exists in China.

I am not sure what my task as moderator is in this. If people want to confess their criminal tendencies, it is not really against the charter.

Things are of course exactly as Ronald says; copyright expires only a long time after someone's death, and the fact that you can get away with a crime unpunished, and others actually do just that, doesn't make it anything less of a crime.

So for now I will leave it at a warning to all readers that they should not be fooled by pleas to engage in thievery.
Another Dutch guy runs in to defend the cause - this is like clockwork. :lol:

And he also puts words into my mouth, rather than trying to understand what my assertion truly was.

Above the law? Beyond the reach of Western law enforcement?

:roll:

If you are racist toward Chinese, that's one thing (it's common for you guys, I've noticed), but don't pretend you understand why I am not.

I shared a link of an engine which I still had on a ten year old HDD, and when I realized that the author didn't approve, I took it down.

This is the reality of what happened.

Any honest person reading can see this clearly.

The rest is Dutch guys creating straw-man, revealing their racism and trying to twist my words...

...which were nothing more than queries to the community - not my common practice.

If you want to preach about piracy, go over to immortal and do it.

Many of your members are already there.
But in this case the Dutch miraculously stand together united :lol:

Copyright is copyright.
Of course Ed, but you're standing together against a strawman they created themselves.

Never once did I say that I condone copyright infringement or sharing of Vincent's engine.

1. Wouldn't I have left the link active if I didn't care about Vincent's feelings on the matter?

2. Wouldn't I also share it with the thousands of guys on my mailing list?

3. Wouldn't I have a history of doing such things given my rather large audience, who would be hungry for such sharing?

Yes, Yes and Yes.
Perhaps you could clarify your position since you feel that it has been misrepresented. I must say that it appeared in some of your posts that you do not have much respect for copyright. Yes, you respected Vincent's wishes and deactivated the download. But in your questioning the practicality of engine authors enforcing their copyright you gave the impression that you do not think copyright is something to be respected. If this is not your position then you have been misunderstood by multiple people.
BrendanJNorman wrote: Your compatriots in their most "gentlemanly" manner, deliberately misrepresented what I'd asserted, insulted a racial group (Chinese), insulted engine testers (calling them "idiots") and insulted me personally - all within the single thread.
1) I don't think that there has been a deliberate misrepresentation since it is not clear what your position is.

2) I believe that if any racial groups or nationalities have been insulted in this thread, you have to include yourself in the list of offenders.

3) Vincent doesn't save his insults for just engine testers.

4) With the exception of Vincent, the insults started with the term "virtue-signaling". That was a misrepresentation of why moderation did what it did.
BrendanJNorman wrote: If they'd read my words for meaning and comprehension (or if they were not so disingenuous) it's absolutely obvious that what I was questioning was the apparent double-standards that exist on this forum.

Not whether copyright infringement is or isn't justified.

None of these guys say a word at the numerous "forums" around the web (which we all know about) where Diep has been illegally downloaded for YEARS (going by past threads I just checked), as well as Komodo, Houdini, and even your work Ed.
Perhaps it is because they do not go to those forums due to a lack of topics/subject matter that they are interested in? Would their opinion on this topic matter at those forums anyway?
BrendanJNorman wrote: They only swoop down like vultures in the safe swamp that is TalkChess forum - somewhere they have complete control.

They swoop down in a meaningless thread where I mistakenly shared a 20 year old engine (thinking there's no harm in it), then quickly retracted it (when learning of the author's feelings).
Is this really your perception of what occurred?
BrendanJNorman wrote: Hostile, grumpy old men like this are the reason there is so little interest in computer chess from the wider chess market.{/quote]

That certainly could be a reason for it :lol:
BrendanJNorman wrote: I myself know people VERY interested in engines, who came to TalkChess as a guest and within 20 minutes or so of reading thought "forget this garbage".

They've told me about this.

All they seen was narrow-minded, arrogant guys bullying others.
I know of many people myself. I also know that a large subset are interested solely in what entertainment they can derive from the chess engines. A majority of those people have no interest in what it takes to create an engine, nor do they care much about the people who do the creating. Given that CCC is where a significant proportion of engine authors interact with end-users, there will be turbulence when someone acts in ways that are disrespectful to the authors.
BrendanJNorman wrote: I am doing more myself to convert the average chess player into a computer chess enthusiast - in the 2 years my site has been up - than some of these guys have in 20 years of releasing their engines to a tiny group of "testers".
That's great! But quite honestly, many authors are simply combining two interests or abilities that they have - programming and chess - into one project. It has not been their goal to create a wider audience.
BrendanJNorman wrote: There are thousands of average chessplayers reading computer chess articles, challenging chess engines and otherwise embracing our hobby - because of me.
Again, that is great. I am not sure of its relevance in this discussion, but I am glad that your website is popular.

BrendanJNorman wrote: This guy refused to release his engine (even for a price!), and this is fine, but calling his fans "idiots" is morally worse than my sharing the engine.
No one has written a cross word to you at all for sharing the engine, not even Vincent. It was the subsequent posts that created the appearance you do not have much respect for copyright which created the responses.

BrendanJNorman wrote: Judging my character based on the country I live in is called racism - another very sensitive word these days, but applicable in this case.
That did not occur. And a misuse of the term "racism".

BrendanJNorman wrote: There was never a strong opposition to his copyright claim from me - you can all see this once free from your very clear cognitive biases.
The problem for some was not the strength of your opposition, but that it existed.

BrendanJNorman wrote: Last night I received an email from a well-wisher (not a TC member) who, having read this thread, urged me to leave this heavily polluted forum - which is what I will do.

P.S. None of this is against you Ed, who I have admired for years already.
Hopefully you will not leave. You share interesting content at CCC.
Thanks for your thoughts Adam, and I'd like to do them justice with a thoughtful response...

But I'm tired of this tennis match - I don't come here for this.

There are plenty of people to argue with, who I have no choice but to deal with...

Thankfully, in my leisure time I get to choose.

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 4415
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by Ovyron » Sun Jan 28, 2018 4:27 pm

Hey Brendan, have you considered creating a computer chess forum for Chess Cognac? Many Talkchess replacements have been attempted in the past, some with resounding success, but never long-lived. Perhaps you can try to have a place without all the pollution from here.

supersharp77
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 5:54 am
Location: Southwest USA

Diep Creator Vincent D.-Diep Rating withbugfix 4000+!!

Post by supersharp77 » Sun Jan 28, 2018 5:03 pm

diep wrote:Hello,

I just hop in, in the discussion without reading the threads here as i simply lack time for that.

Diep is not free to copy. It's not freeware and abandonware i've never heard of either.

Diep development stopped in december 2012, though if you'd fix just the bugs in search, some are so stupid you wouldn't believe that something with such huge bugs can have such high elo, it would be elo 4000+ or so.

Yet it would be very fulltime work to test all those bugs out.

If you look how strong some of the engines nowadays are tuned, it would be a lot of fulltime work to make up all that elo.

For sure i do not have time to do all that. I'm about to release a professional 3d printer to market and hope it sells well, though it still some work to release it.

I'm busy with robotics, cad design and 3d printing since 2012.
Of course pondering cannot be turned off, who wants to waste system time?

Testers are such idiots that already start this century i figured out that some of the testers managed to run it without permanent brain on under conditions it should've been turned on. Also it's possible some cheat software back then managed to turn of permanent brain in opponent engines and kept it turned on in their own engine giving them a major edge.
Well My Friend That is one Hell of a boast..and without testing
how does one PROVE such a wild claim? AR :D :wink:

User avatar
Greg Strong
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 5:57 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by Greg Strong » Sun Jan 28, 2018 5:40 pm

Evert wrote:In fact, you can let people copy your work for quite a while, and the sue the whole lot of them.
Are you sure about that? There is a legal concept called "failure to mitigate damages." Basically, at least in some circumstances, if you do not make an attempt to protect yourself you can lose the right to recover any damages.

I realize this isn't quite the situation we are talking about, but it's an interesting example: Compuserve invented the GIF file format and allowed it to be used freely. It became very popular and was used all over the web. Then Compuserve decided to try to make some money off it and demanded licensing fees. The courts ruled that it was too late for that.

User avatar
MikeB
Posts: 4725
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:34 am
Location: Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by MikeB » Sun Jan 28, 2018 6:04 pm

Rebel wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:
hgm wrote:
syzygy wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:Have the owners of Houdini, Komodo etc taken ANYONE to court over it?
Oh my...

You believe that something illegal becomes legal when people go unpunished.
You believe that valid copyrights somehow cease to exist when they are being violated.

Believe what you want, but that does not make it true.

But I do hope that the moderators here take action to stop the propagation of your lies on this senstivie topic.
Well, earlier postings of this guy have revealed he considers himself above the law in any case, because he is living in China, beyond the reach of any western law enforcement. And we all know how much respect for copyright exists in China.

I am not sure what my task as moderator is in this. If people want to confess their criminal tendencies, it is not really against the charter.

Things are of course exactly as Ronald says; copyright expires only a long time after someone's death, and the fact that you can get away with a crime unpunished, and others actually do just that, doesn't make it anything less of a crime.

So for now I will leave it at a warning to all readers that they should not be fooled by pleas to engage in thievery.
Another Dutch guy runs in to defend the cause - this is like clockwork. :lol:

And he also puts words into my mouth, rather than trying to understand what my assertion truly was.

Above the law? Beyond the reach of Western law enforcement?

:roll:

If you are racist toward Chinese, that's one thing (it's common for you guys, I've noticed), but don't pretend you understand why I am not.

I shared a link of an engine which I still had on a ten year old HDD, and when I realized that the author didn't approve, I took it down.

This is the reality of what happened.

Any honest person reading can see this clearly.

The rest is Dutch guys creating straw-man, revealing their racism and trying to twist my words...

...which were nothing more than queries to the community - not my common practice.

If you want to preach about piracy, go over to immortal and do it.

Many of your members are already there.
But in this case the Dutch miraculously stand together united :lol:

Copyright is copyright.
One of those threads that has taken life of its own, but I do applaud and stand united with all those who support, respect and are outspoken that laws are laws and they should be followed. That's the way civilization has developed over thousands of years and without laws and without people respecting the law, what follows is chaos and anarchy and its not a better place to live. Property rights should be respected, or else it's no different than a squatter taking over your homestead while you go on two year journey to travel the world and you return to somebody living in your house, And the response is . "I thought it was abandoned and it became a free home". Sorry my friend, that not how it works and nor should it work that way. To think otherwise is totally ludicrous, and you should hit your reset button.

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Newport. Shropshire, UK.
Full name: Harvey Williamson
Contact:

Re: Diep 2.0

Post by Harvey Williamson » Sun Jan 28, 2018 7:30 pm

MikeB wrote:
One of those threads that has taken life of its own, but I do applaud and stand united with all those who support, respect and are outspoken that laws are laws and they should be followed. That's the way civilization has developed over thousands of years and without laws and without people respecting the law, what follows is chaos and anarchy and its not a better place to live. Property rights should be respected, or else it's no different than a squatter taking over your homestead while you go on two year journey to travel the world and you return to somebody living in your house, And the response is . "I thought it was abandoned and it became a free home". Sorry my friend, that not how it works and nor should it work that way. To think otherwise is totally ludicrous, and you should hit your reset button.
A great post to end on, I think. I am not Dutch but it is, probably, time to end this discussion!

Locked