I'm in doubt if RobboLito is a clone

[bob]

Not only that, but given by what some people here seem willing to believe, they won't be convinced until you include an entire explanation why the disassembled code from Rybka matches the source code in Ippolit, at a level they can understand, i.e. explaining assembler, chess program structure and search, etc.

You don't have to convince the masses. You can certainly find 5-10 trustworthy and unbiased experts who may *all* claim independently that the match exists. We will believe a 10-0 vote.

we already had about that the last time this came up.

[Terry McCracken]

Although back then I was suspicious that Vas broke the GPL or looked that way never reached a Final Verdict and even if he did breach the GPL I wouldn't go as far to say he's dishonest. Crooks are dishonest and the people behind Ippolit are just that.

The damage it seems has already been done.

The problem is that changing your code to not break the GPL is easy if one is willing to spend the time. The ideas in Fruit are not copyrighted, just the implementation.

So all that needs to be done is take code, change the implementation, but keep the same logic in your commercial code. This is not really violating GPL, though ethically there is a gray area. Zach is probably referring to this gray area in Rybka 1's implementation, which is a fair point.

This obviously does not condone the illegal release of reverse engineered code to the public (aka Ippolit style). The potential ethical (but not illegal) transgression is minor compared to the highly illegal reverse engineering of closed source code.

Here's a key point. There are definitely pieces of fruit in rybka 1. Which means it is quite likely they remain in 2 and 3. Legally the source for all 3 must be released under the GPL as well, since the thing has _already_ been sold. Which means that one could make the argument that if IPPOLIT is a reverse-engineered source for R3, it makes everything nice and legal in a twisted way.

This is a problem that should never have happened in the first place. But the genie was let out of the bottle a few years ago, and again now. There's more than enough wrongdoing here to go around...

Amen to that!

We have to erect a dam before computer chess as we know it is washed away.

[bob]

You don't have to convince the masses.

During the Strelka affair, two respected experts asserted that it is not a clone.

Memory... is it a blessing or a curse?

I don't mention it to critizise them; nobody is perfect. I just mean to say that even experts can fail as we have seen in a clone case. Why shouldn't I consider that it's the other way around this time?

Later, experts were very busy trying to prove that (what they obviously were convinced of) Rybka itself is a clone. The big "wow"! Did I miss something or has that fizzled out...

First, which two "experts" came to that conclusion? Certainly not any of the experts that were actually looking at the code. It didn't "fizzle out". A conclusion was reached that was convincing enough for the "experts" to answer the question and move on. Some will _never_ be convinced. Some don't believe we landed on the moon. Nothing new.

I don't want to go so far to say, if I search for the truth I look at the predominant opinion in CCC, and then I believe the opposite...

[Christopher Conkie]

There's a difference between meaning and final word. I got the impression all experts have expressed their meaning up to now since none of them knows Rybka intimately enough for a final word. And a voting based on meanings will not be accepted by the sceptics. So I believe not much would be won with this committee unless it explains thoroughly how it came to its conclusion.

Raimund, I totally agree with you. My intention is that committee members disassemble/decompile Rybka 3 and make their vote based on comparison of the two C 'sources'.

Hehe....

I'm saying nothing. I'll let some programmer tell you why what you are saying is nonsense.

Sorry Gabor, but that is very very funny. Disassemble it right? Compare the two C sources....right?

Hehe



Christopher

[ernest]

I'd nominate Dann Corbit as one of the experts. He's IMO the most unbiased person who understands codes.

I also respect Dann very much, but wasn't it Dann who said Strelka was not a clone? (IIRC)

[Volker Pittlik]

I think the idea of the commission will never work.

- I respect the suggested people and their opinion count a lot for me.
- The cloners will never respect whomever.
- There are enough "chess lovers" around to use or even buy programs of questionable origin.
- In addition there are enough people who "have to" have the "strongest" engine around, even if it was "programmed" by the devil himself.

vp

[Christopher Conkie]

I'd nominate Dann Corbit as one of the experts. He's IMO the most unbiased person who understands codes.

I also respect Dann very much, but wasn't it Dann who said Strelka was not a clone? (IIRC)

Hahahahahaha

This just gets better and better.

Dann? Are you out there? They "nominate" you to "disassemble Rybka and to "compare the two C source codes????!!"

Tremendous stuff.....can't wait for the reply.

Hehe. Please don't stop.....this is fun.

Christopher

[swami]

I'd nominate Dann Corbit as one of the experts. He's IMO the most unbiased person who understands codes.

I also respect Dann very much, but wasn't it Dann who said Strelka was not a clone? (IIRC)

Hahahahahaha

This just gets better and better.

Dann? Are you out there? They "nominate" you to "disassemble Rybka and to "compare the two C source codes????!!"

Tremendous stuff.....can't wait for the reply.

Hehe. Please don't stop.....this is fun.

Christopher

I nominated them to compare the source code of whatever engine with that of early version of Strelka (which plays exactly like Rybka - word for word, move for move)

also to compare the code with Fruit and other open source engines, check analysis lines to intuit whether there's any significant similarity.

If that ain't enough, then I'd agree that a committee doesn't make sense.

[Christopher Conkie]

I'd nominate Dann Corbit as one of the experts. He's IMO the most unbiased person who understands codes.

I also respect Dann very much, but wasn't it Dann who said Strelka was not a clone? (IIRC)

Hahahahahaha

This just gets better and better.

Dann? Are you out there? They "nominate" you to "disassemble Rybka and to "compare the two C source codes????!!"

Tremendous stuff.....can't wait for the reply.

Hehe. Please don't stop.....this is fun.

Christopher

I nominated them to compare the source code of whatever engine with that of early version of Strelka (which plays exactly like Rybka - word for word, move for move)

also to compare the code with Fruit and other open source engines, check analysis lines to intuit whether there's any significant similarity.

If that ain't enough, then I'd agree that a committee doesn't make sense.

And how do you propose to compare the source of Ippolit with source code of Rybka.

You could always ask Chris or Ed you know (note not Thorsten). It would make a change from movies. I'm being serious, go ask them.

I'll be watching for the reply.



Christopher

[bob]

I don't speculate. Zach has based a definitive conclusion based on the inconclusive. Even if he were right.......

What goes around comes around...

That does not make it right, to say the above statement. If he really feels that way, the victory of revenge is most often only piric.

Christopher

It's certainly not inconclusive to me. There is no question what took place to me, and several other people.

Vas has made what I would guess is quite a bit of money dishonestly by stealing from open source. Allowing open source to benefit from what he has done is only fair IMO. I suppose two wrongs don't make a right, but one wrong doesn't either.

I think this whole situation would be a bit different if the atmosphere in the community were different. Nobody, minus a very select few, listened to the concerns that were made about Rybka 1. I don't want Vas to quit, I just want everyone to acknowledge what actually happened, Vas included.

Vas has not made any money by Rybka 1.0, it was free.

The people who is gonna benefit most are the other commersial program makers. They will be able to close the gap and sell more of their programs.

2 and 3 were _not_ free. Do you believe one rewrites every line from scratch for the next version? I don't. There is still code in Crafty (significant pieces in fact) dating back to version 1.0.