Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

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

Moderator: Ras

User avatar
geots
Posts: 4790
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:42 am

Re: Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

Post by geots »

Terry McCracken wrote:
geots wrote:
bob wrote:
swami wrote:Note that this is the discussion about Free version of Rybka (Rybka 1.0)

Zach gave me a permission to edit the thread title and and insert "1.0" next to the engine name wherever he mentioned the engine, just to avoid confusion.

I agree with ChrisW that whenever you mention Rybka, It'd help if you include the version number along with it.
I am not personally convinced that it matters. What is the probability that Rybka 3 is vastly different from Rybka2, and R2 vastly different from V1? Most do not do _complete_ rewrites, which means much GPL code, if it was present in R1 will also be present in R3. So this realistically applies to all versions, if it applies to any.

"if it applies to any"......... Extremely clever way you phrase that, when one considers that anyone with one eye and half a brain already knows your true feelings about this whole issue.
Bob has the right to express his professional opinion in this matter. Whether you agree or not.

Terry, from Christophe's thread and yours also- it is easy to see that neither of you caught on to what i was trying to get across. As Bob is certainly entitled to his opinion- i as well am entitled to mine.
Last edited by geots on Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tony

Re: Wanted: some opposition to the provided evidence

Post by Tony »

Terry McCracken wrote:
tiger wrote:
Uri Blass wrote:<snipped>
trojanfoe wrote: That's not true, as Bob has repeatedly said. The chance that 800 lines of code will be the same from 2 different programmers, even when given the same assignment at the same time, is very very small.

Cheers,
Andy
I think that things are dependent on the assignment.
If the assignment contain 1000 small assignements that everyone of them is 10 lines then it is possible to have 800 lines that are the same without
copying.

Uri


This has nothing to do with the current case and you know it. Your quibble can only confuse people who are not familiar with the field of programming.

I'm really starting to believe that all you want is to divert the attention from the real topic.



// Christophe
Both Uri and Rolf, Rolf even more so have made a complete mess of this thread.

It's very frustrating to come into this forum half a day later and wade through 50 useless postings just to see anything of importance.

Terry
I'm sure that must be purely accidental.

Tony
bob
Posts: 20943
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

Post by bob »

geots wrote:
bob wrote:
swami wrote:Note that this is the discussion about Free version of Rybka (Rybka 1.0)

Zach gave me a permission to edit the thread title and and insert "1.0" next to the engine name wherever he mentioned the engine, just to avoid confusion.

I agree with ChrisW that whenever you mention Rybka, It'd help if you include the version number along with it.
I am not personally convinced that it matters. What is the probability that Rybka 3 is vastly different from Rybka2, and R2 vastly different from V1? Most do not do _complete_ rewrites, which means much GPL code, if it was present in R1 will also be present in R3. So this realistically applies to all versions, if it applies to any.

"if it applies to any"......... Extremely clever way you phrase that, when one considers that anyone with one eye and half a brain already knows your true feelings about this whole issue.
So you are also a mind-reader as well? I am, and always have been "anti-clone". Other than that I have little interest in what goes on in computer chess misbehavior. But "clones" and "copying" indirectly affects everyone that is active... But I'd be interested in what you think "I think about the whole issue". I'm only following the GPL discussion and that is an important issue to consider.
Terry McCracken
Posts: 16465
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:16 am
Location: Canada

Re: Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

Post by Terry McCracken »

bob wrote:
Rolf wrote:
bob wrote:
Rolf wrote:
bob wrote: There is no way that these discussions won't be offensive in some way, because in the clone thread, the underlying premise is that someone has copied something that should not be copied. But perhaps a legal opinion might be informative here. A lawyer friend of mine had called me about something and I chatted a few minutes about the ongoing discussions. And he pointed out that _somewhere_ such accusations have to be made. I asked "OK, if they come out in a courtroom, what happens, particularly if they are proven false?" He said "that is privileged discussion and you can't be sued for something you say under oath in court. You can be prosecuted if it is proven that you perjured yourself, but that is all." And in thinking about that, that should be the way this is conducted. If accusations can not be made, they can not be discussed, proven or disproven, and the situation does not get improved as a result.
And Bob, just this to my many others: there is no such thing called friendship and respect in this scene, no? And Vas has gone commercial and that is what happens but what you can not estimate. True? And did you also ask your law expert what happens in court if a campaign like man hunt could be proven? Is that also allowed in the Law in the USA? In such a public forum? Where only writing affords registration??? Are there no internet laws in the States? And man hunt in the style of virtual witch hunt is tolerated? Not to speak of business damages... Why not seeking a sort of peace? But ok with your team that couldnt be the goal. ..

What you wrote above in boald letters from my side, means that Zach and others are actively commiting witch-hunt nothing else. Because this has absolutely no relevance when he said but I will continue to ask as long as I get answers. Only he wont get some. So this is a fine forum for Zach. For how long this will bew supported? Forever? <lol>
I do not follow your line of reasoning. What you converted to bold face font is a simple statement that has nothing to do with anybody in particular...
I had understood that you wouldnt see this in a court. That has two consequences. Only in court one could make real accusations but here out of court you can go on forever without reasonable effects. I didnt think it was addressed to someone but it was sort of credo from you after the long and extended debate. Could we agree on that somehow?
The only legal problem I see looming is for me, because one day I am going to come to your house and kill all those damned monkeys you have typing over there. :)

I have made no accusations. I have had two consistent comments that I have made multiple times:

(1) one would choose to obfuscate nodes, depth and PV if one wanted to attempt to hide/conceal internal details of how the search works.

(2) the source code snippets posted here provide a direct link between fruit and strelka/rybka, when examined closely. I've not done the data / evidence gathering, I simply commented on what was being shown.

So there is no "credo" I follow, other than I would personally like to see the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth at some point in time. One can be convicted without ever taking the witness stand, if the evidence piles up until it becomes overwhelming. We are not there yet, but it is piling up with no contest from anyone at all.
bob wrote:The only legal problem I see looming is for me, because one day I am going to come to your house and kill all those damned monkeys you have typing over there. :)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Terry McCracken
Posts: 16465
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:16 am
Location: Canada

Re: Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

Post by Terry McCracken »

geots wrote:
Terry McCracken wrote:
geots wrote:
bob wrote:
swami wrote:Note that this is the discussion about Free version of Rybka (Rybka 1.0)

Zach gave me a permission to edit the thread title and and insert "1.0" next to the engine name wherever he mentioned the engine, just to avoid confusion.

I agree with ChrisW that whenever you mention Rybka, It'd help if you include the version number along with it.
I am not personally convinced that it matters. What is the probability that Rybka 3 is vastly different from Rybka2, and R2 vastly different from V1? Most do not do _complete_ rewrites, which means much GPL code, if it was present in R1 will also be present in R3. So this realistically applies to all versions, if it applies to any.

"if it applies to any"......... Extremely clever way you phrase that, when one considers that anyone with one eye and half a brain already knows your true feelings about this whole issue.
Bob has the right to express his professional opinion in this matter. Whether you agree or not.

Terry, from Christophe's thread and yours also- it is easy to see that neither of you caught on to what i was trying to get across. As Bob is certainly entitled to his opinion- i as well am entitled to mine.
Yes you are but you're suggesting Bob's assessment is defamatory, IE the carry over part....


Christophe and myself can read George.
Terry McCracken
Posts: 16465
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:16 am
Location: Canada

Re: Wanted: some opposition to the provided evidence

Post by Terry McCracken »

Tony wrote:
Terry McCracken wrote:
tiger wrote:
Uri Blass wrote:<snipped>
trojanfoe wrote: That's not true, as Bob has repeatedly said. The chance that 800 lines of code will be the same from 2 different programmers, even when given the same assignment at the same time, is very very small.

Cheers,
Andy
I think that things are dependent on the assignment.
If the assignment contain 1000 small assignements that everyone of them is 10 lines then it is possible to have 800 lines that are the same without
copying.

Uri


This has nothing to do with the current case and you know it. Your quibble can only confuse people who are not familiar with the field of programming.

I'm really starting to believe that all you want is to divert the attention from the real topic.



// Christophe
Both Uri and Rolf, Rolf even more so have made a complete mess of this thread.

It's very frustrating to come into this forum half a day later and wade through 50 useless postings just to see anything of importance.

Terry
I'm sure that must be purely accidental.

Tony
Naturally :wink:

Terry
bob
Posts: 20943
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Wanted: some opposition to the provided evidence

Post by bob »

Rolf wrote:
bob wrote:
Rolf wrote:
trojanfoe wrote:
Rolf wrote: I repeat my standpoint. Since you dont ask the other commercial programmers where they took their stuff from, you have no right to ask Vas. Or it looks biased. And above all if Vas doesnt answer you cant continue a campaign like repetition of always the same stuff. All IMO.
There is nothing biased about it - the investigations start indepedently based on suspiscion. If a person makes a claim in this forum, for example, there are enough people with programming experience to quickly shoot down any unfair claims. That hasn't happened in this thread as all the pro-Rybka participants are able to do is complain that the investigation is invalid and based on personal jealously. None of the pro-Rybka folk have successfully countered any of the technical details presented. It's almost political in nature in fact.

Cheers,
Andy
Andy, you cant seriously mean it. Apart from me and partially Uri there is nobody here in defense of Rybka. Didnt you see this? If you would change into Rybka forum you would see many people who think different. But why should they argue in this climate. The reason for me to make some arguments is NOT that I know for sure what is going on but when the anti-Vas side is making shallow messages. Of course I cant judge on the quoted code at all. But I have experience how people are doing a witch-hunt. This is actually what is happening here. Of course the triumph will be China. Otherwise these people here cant hurt Vas and Rybka.

Since you are a new name for me, just for me, and I still take you on a high level and ethical grounds would you please comment on what Corbit has reported here, namely that as he showed the analyses to Fabien, he reacted so, that he didnt care. And although some have explained that this meant that others couldt neither do something. But we still have the campaign here. Could you explain to a lay what tghis is all about? Some wrote "envie" but why?

And then we have a strange situation that the main attackers have themselves a special standing. I wait on a short exchange wih Bob and then I will decide how to handle that topic.

If you could help with some thoughtful reflections then it would be positive for the community. You know I can only oppose as a democrat and humanistic guy all kind of doctored annihilation of other peple and the products of their talents.

My fantasy often tells me that Vas will retaliate at his chosen moment and then people should not be surprised if they are taken to task. In case they are Europeans like CT. I fully agree with what Graham has written.
I do not believe any sort of legal action will happen. It will be too costly. If Vas tries to sue someone, the initial cost is non-trivial. If he loses, he will end up paying a ton of attorney fees for both sides. He will have to offer proof that the source code being shown here is not in his program, which means he will have to reveal the source in a public record. If there is any substance to the speculation being made, it will go downhill from there.

There are some doors you just don't want to open... even if the current claims being made are completely wrong, legal action is a dangerous path to start down...
Ok, so all from the USA are fine. But I for one had alsways worried for people like CT who must live under the miserable Europe and France conditions. That could cost a whole lot because we dont know the complicated jury system in the USA. Here CT might be responsible for the whole thing and that with his data...

But I must confess something else Bob. Honestly I couldnt imagine that people existed who stand up against such a talent like Vasik without that they had a chance to sue Vasik in return, that was what I feared most. But if this doesnt even play a role for you then I'm left helpless why people showed so much negative from their characters. People who either left the scene in frustration, have apologized for _____ and who are themselves so talented like Zach but dont write own code for the competition. This is incredible to get for me, Bob. When people will learn from your role model? Could you ever have done all this internet communication with a negative attutude. With gallic hate speech? Not imaginable. - peace for all!
Here is a summary of my thoughts, given in bits and pieces in previous posts.

1. Vas is obviously talented. Whether he originally copied fruit or not. He either wrote the currently strongest chess program from scratch, or else he copied fruit and then modified it into the stongest program around. Either task is not simple.

2. I did not ever like the "amateur turns professional" approach when the amateur lurks and asks lots of questions, and learns lots of things that would normally take years, and then when he finds a new idea, mum is the word. But I have lived with that for years and it doesn't cause me to lose sleep.

3. If Vas copied Fruit, he ought to simply say so. Then he could rewrite every remaining line and be free of the GPL requirements and this would settle down.

4. If he didn't copy fruit, then he ought to explain the glaring similarities between strelka (which he claims as his own) and Fruit, as presented by various posters here.

As far as I am concerned, either 3 or 4 would close this book and everyone would move on. But right now, the claims and questions are being answered by a deafening silence. Silence is a form of fertilizer for these discussions and they will continue to grow.
bob
Posts: 20943
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Double standards

Post by bob »

tiger wrote:
chrisw wrote:
tiger wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
chrisw wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
Tony Thomas wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
Tony wrote: Uri,

who are you defending ? Vasik or yourself ?

Tony
Apparently Vas isn't under attack here, so why would he need defending?
Vas isnt under attack, only the origin of his program is.
That's the excuse constantly being used - yes.
His integrity and honesty are under attack through the insinuations being made.
Graham,

How do you propose moderation deals with this different to the way it is doing?

You were noderator last time, please inform us which posts you would have deleted out of this thread .......
Boy - that's the million dollar question! :wink:
The problem with CCC is that there's this thing called the charter which unfortunately severely inhibits this sort of discussion.

I would have thought that questioning the legality of an engine falls under the guise of a legally questionable post.

Also, by questioning the legality of an engine in such a manner, one is attacking the honesty and integrity of the engine author, so you're on the fringe with regards to the charter that prohibits personal or libellous attacks.

Unfortunately, if you enforce the charter, such discussions would therefore not be allowed. I'm not saying whether that's a good or bad thing, but that's the fact of the matter.

Hope that explains the predicament that faces the moderators in such situations.

The reason I didn't stand again was so that I no longer had to make such decisions, so I have to leave that to the current team.
Be warned though that you'll cop abuse no matter what you do, although I know that you're already aware of this.

Cheers, Graham.

PS - I think that your post on clones at the top of the page makes the position of the moderators clear.


Questionning the legality of an engine has been done several times in the recent past of CCC. How many times has it happened? 10 times? More?

I have never seen anybody standing up and saying it was against the charter.

Thanks to the discussions, a number of clones or illegal derived works have been discovered.

CCC is the place for these discussions to happen. The moderators' job is to let them happen, but under reasonable control.

// Christophe
Tres drole Christophe ;-)

What is exactly "under reasonable control"?

I was under the impression mods were trying to "reasonably control" the discussion, but I am rapidly coming to the conclusion this is not actually a moderatable discussion.

One man's "reasonable control" is another's "fascist dicatorship" and yet another's "anarchic disorder". When the petty gripes of those who feel their toes have been stepped on overspill into my private domain with threats pouring into my private email address (54 threatening and demanding and complaining emails from one person for example), I would say that moderation of the forums itself is under attack.


My opinion is that so far the discussion has remained under reasonable control except for one troll in high activity.

I'm sorry to learn that the moderators are under attack on their private emails.

It's very revealing if instead of contradicting the fact presented here some feel the need to threaten the moderators.



// Christophe
I agree. There is an old debate-coach axiom:

"rather than increasing your volume, reinforce your argument."

There are lots of facts coming from one side, silence from the other, except that they are loudly clamoring for the discussion to end. Convince everyone why it should end, by addressing the data being shown, and it will end on its own.
User avatar
geots
Posts: 4790
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:42 am

Re: Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

Post by geots »

bob wrote:
geots wrote:
bob wrote:
swami wrote:Note that this is the discussion about Free version of Rybka (Rybka 1.0)

Zach gave me a permission to edit the thread title and and insert "1.0" next to the engine name wherever he mentioned the engine, just to avoid confusion.

I agree with ChrisW that whenever you mention Rybka, It'd help if you include the version number along with it.
I am not personally convinced that it matters. What is the probability that Rybka 3 is vastly different from Rybka2, and R2 vastly different from V1? Most do not do _complete_ rewrites, which means much GPL code, if it was present in R1 will also be present in R3. So this realistically applies to all versions, if it applies to any.

"if it applies to any"......... Extremely clever way you phrase that, when one considers that anyone with one eye and half a brain already knows your true feelings about this whole issue.
So you are also a mind-reader as well? I am, and always have been "anti-clone". Other than that I have little interest in what goes on in computer chess misbehavior. But "clones" and "copying" indirectly affects everyone that is active... But I'd be interested in what you think "I think about the whole issue". I'm only following the GPL discussion and that is an important issue to consider.


But I'd be interested in what you think "I think about the whole issue". Ah, i never thought i would hear those words coming from you. Nice that you added "whole issue" - because what i am referring to has nothing to do with GPL licenses, legality in the computerchess field, or anything so mundane as that. Please lets dont argue about the appropriatness of the word "mundane" here. Each to his own. Past that- it's not a matter of what "I think you think"- but a matter of what "I know you wish".
User avatar
Rolf
Posts: 6081
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:14 pm
Location: Munster, Nuremberg, Princeton

Re: Rybka 1.0 vs. Strelka

Post by Rolf »

bob wrote: The only legal problem I see looming is for me, because one day I am going to come to your house and kill all those damned monkeys you have typing over there. :)

I have made no accusations. I have had two consistent comments that I have made multiple times:

(1) one would choose to obfuscate nodes, depth and PV if one wanted to attempt to hide/conceal internal details of how the search works.

(2) the source code snippets posted here provide a direct link between fruit and strelka/rybka, when examined closely. I've not done the data / evidence gathering, I simply commented on what was being shown.

So there is no "credo" I follow, other than I would personally like to see the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth at some point in time. One can be convicted without ever taking the witness stand, if the evidence piles up until it becomes overwhelming. We are not there yet, but it is piling up with no contest from anyone at all.

ad 1) correct if you wanted to then you would do this. Fine. But the reverse is wrong. If you do it then the only reason could be you wanted to "cheat". Bob, this is just nonsense. Logically. But perhaps programmers have always both directions in mind.

ad 2) are you really happy to rely anything on the Osipov activities? And how do you know who he was and what motives had held him? What is the difference in your eyes between a reverse doctored Rybka 1 and Tiger 14? What sense does it give you ff you must work with illegally doctored data? Would you help to doctor Tiger for balance reasons? Or let's take Fritz 9. Would you help? If not why you are here in it against Rybka 1? Out of cooperation with CT in a revival of Ruffian times?

Why not dream with me on peace? Making a picture in our brains and then let it become real? Peace is better than watching something piling up. Let' get ethical, Bob! Please! Peace for all!
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz