Rybka disqualified and banned from World Computer Chess Cham

[Dann Corbit]

"Don't believe when you're told "There's no free lunch!" There is Linux."

That's one expensive free lunch:
http://shop.novell.com/store/novell/Dis ... ID.2872000
https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/cata ... *.4b748952
http://www.ubuntu.com/business/services/server
http://store.mandriva.com/product_info. ... cts_id=433
http://www.pantek.com/linux.php?subsect ... gwod6VF0XQ
etc.

I suppose if you make a razor and give it away and sell the blades, then the razor was free in some sense.

BTW, I am a Linux fan, and I think it is the best platform for servers available.

Just download Fedora and go. zero cost.

A business needs to maintain the servers. If you budget zero cost, then your business fails.

[K I Hyams]

It still remains to be the strongest and the best engine in the planet.

It is not clear why you think that. Look at the results of Houdini, an engine of similar legitimacy.

Fruit and Crafty should not have released their sources in the first place if they don't want people learning from them.

Another thing which is not clear is why you should think that Rajlich simply used Fruit and Crafty as learning resources. Perhaps it is a consequence of parking your head in an orifice into which the sun does not shine. Either way, perhaps this quote from the ICGA will shed some light on the matter for you.

“By a unanimous 5-0 decision of executive members of the ICGA we find ourselves in agreement with the verdict of the Secretariat’s report. We are convinced that the evidence against Vasik Rajlich is both overwhelming in its volume and beyond reasonable question in its nature. Vasik Rajlich is guilty of plagiarizing the programs Crafty and Fruit, and has violated the ICGA’s tournament rules with respect to the World Computer Chess Championships in the years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. Specifically, Vasik Rajlich, on all five occasions, violated Tournament Rule 2 which requires that....................”

Absolutely unequivocal, absolutely damning. As it is not clear why you think that Rajlich simply learnt from Fruit and Crafty, perhaps you would be kind enough to explain. The ICGA article touches on some of the undesirable consequences of Rajlich’s behaviour. The list below is more complete. He:
1. Destroyed the element of fair competition that motivates some amateur authors.
2. Deceived tournament directors.
3. Deceived other authors.
4. Stole titles from those who would otherwise have earned them.
5. Diverted prize money away from those who would otherwise have earned it into his own pocket.
6. Diverted the proceeds of engine sales away from those professional authors who would otherwise have benefited from them.
7. Deceived those who bought his engines into thinking that they were legitimate pieces of work.
8. Repeatedly told lies.
9. Repeatedly displayed hypocrisy.

Fruit and Crafty should not have released their sources in the first place if they don't want people learning from them.

Why do you try to blame the victims of abuse, instead of the abuser? I wonder whether you are one of those people who think that women who make themselves look attractive to men deserve to be raped. There are a number of reasons why engines are released with an open source and there are a number of reasons why women try to look attractive. None of those reasons, in either case, justifies disregarding legitimate and clearly stated wishes of the victim.

[Shaun]

A sad day for computerchess?

Perhaps it's not the best day for computer chess, but it can be a good day if the actions taken serve as a positive influence on current and future authors who might otherwise might think that they can easily get away with unauthorized cloning.

The treatment of Vas is not consistent - lets now examine a few more top engines. I wonder how many would pass, who knows a few unknown authors might end up with a world title

If we can come up with a view on what can be copied / used and apply that consistently then perhaps something good will come of this mess.

Even if we assume Vas started from Fruit 2.1, something that I am not convinced of, he added over 450 elo (CCRL 40/40) over 6 years or so. This is not the same as taking an open source engine or decompiled source and making some tweaks...

Shaun

Law enforcement folks always tell the same "short story". Traffic is moving down an interstate at 85+ mph in a 70 mph speed limit zone. Trooper pulls one guy over and starts to write him a ticket. "But everybody was driving over 85 and I was just keeping up with traffic to be safer." The trooper responded "Yes, but I caught YOU."

Vas caught himself when the Strelka fiasco came to light. That started the ball rolling. Nobody is going to volunteer to disassemble every commercial engine because it is both hard and time-consuming. However, given some evidence to support a suspicion, things will happen. Problem is, most sit back and say "this isn't fair, somebody should look at every commercial program." That "somebody" could include the person writing the comment, of course...

Using your analogy it feels to me like the Trooper was following the driver for 6 years waiting for a mistake or the opportunity to reveal a mistake in the past...

And certainly if Loop gets awarded anything that would be a very bad joke.

[michiguel]

For now ChessBase is still selling Rybka.

clearly, he can keep selling it.

wouldn't further action would be needed, i.e. an expensive and victorious law suit,
brought by...FSF or Ryan Benitez, or Bob Hyatt for damages...hmmm
loss of income? no i guess not

well who knows?

this however is simply a disqualification from a gaming association, a rather harsh 'slap' on the fanny, and go stand in the corner,
(thanks John Conway for the nice image and apt analogy)

sorry, but it probably won't faze them one bit IMO, and it's clearly a product for which there's a demand.

I noticed in the investigation report that two people from ChessBase were also in the panel:

Albert Silver (software designer for Chess Assistant (1999-2002); currently editor of Chessbase News (2010-present))

Frederic Friedel (Chessbase.com)

It seems they were at least interested in the outcome, what they'll do I don't know.

Neither of us were on the panel. We were merely given access to the forums where the debate and analysis took place.

Then why are they using your name? did you sign or agree on the final report?

Miguel

The "secretariat" was formed by David. Three of us. The "panel" was comprised of anyone that had forum access, as anyone could make comments, suggestions, provide new information, or criticize existing information...

From the report, it looked like the panel members (including A. Silver), signed it. Did they not?

Miguel

[oreopoulos]

Correct. I have given _many_ permission to use the rotated bit-board code in older versions of Crafty. And I explained my reasoning that suggested that such code was OK to borrow. But then again, when someone asked, they included an acknowledgement. Vas claimed _everything_ in his code was original and written by him...

At some point i guess an algorithm becomes common ground and you dont have to write your code from scratch. I guess if you have to write a "sorting" code, you wont start writing it from scratch. There is simply no point at all.

It is not a competition of computer skills.

For example move generation. It has been done this way, that way... another way... ok. When you start, and you understand the code, there is no meaning to reinvent the wheel.

[Richard Allbert]

It's only dangerous for new engines that start out with ca. 3000 elo from the first release.

*EDIT

.. or have a sudden massive increase in strength

[bob]

"Don't believe when you're told "There's no free lunch!" There is Linux."

That's one expensive free lunch:
http://shop.novell.com/store/novell/Dis ... ID.2872000
https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/cata ... *.4b748952
http://www.ubuntu.com/business/services/server
http://store.mandriva.com/product_info. ... cts_id=433
http://www.pantek.com/linux.php?subsect ... gwod6VF0XQ
etc.

I suppose if you make a razor and give it away and sell the blades, then the razor was free in some sense.

BTW, I am a Linux fan, and I think it is the best platform for servers available.

Just download Fedora and go. zero cost.

A business needs to maintain the servers. If you budget zero cost, then your business fails.

However, you need to budget the _same_ amount whether you support windows or linux servers. But with windows, you get to pay for all the software on top of that, so no matter how you measure it, Linux is cheaper. Not to mention more reliable.

[Christopher Conkie]

It's only dangerous for new engines that start out with ca. 3000 elo from the first release.

*EDIT

.. or have a sudden massive increase in strength

It is not just dangerous. It is foolish. You and I both know it don't work like that. To date the highest elo engine I have ever seen on initial release that was legit was Fruit. I may have forgotten something of course. I think Fruit 1.0 beat Zappa 0.82 just about. Might be wrong though. Perhaps someone can confirm.

(By the way, how are you Richard?)



Chris

[bob]

For now ChessBase is still selling Rybka.

clearly, he can keep selling it.

wouldn't further action would be needed, i.e. an expensive and victorious law suit,
brought by...FSF or Ryan Benitez, or Bob Hyatt for damages...hmmm
loss of income? no i guess not

well who knows?

this however is simply a disqualification from a gaming association, a rather harsh 'slap' on the fanny, and go stand in the corner,
(thanks John Conway for the nice image and apt analogy)

sorry, but it probably won't faze them one bit IMO, and it's clearly a product for which there's a demand.

I noticed in the investigation report that two people from ChessBase were also in the panel:

Albert Silver (software designer for Chess Assistant (1999-2002); currently editor of Chessbase News (2010-present))

Frederic Friedel (Chessbase.com)

It seems they were at least interested in the outcome, what they'll do I don't know.

Neither of us were on the panel. We were merely given access to the forums where the debate and analysis took place.

Then why are they using your name? did you sign or agree on the final report?

Miguel

The "secretariat" was formed by David. Three of us. The "panel" was comprised of anyone that had forum access, as anyone could make comments, suggestions, provide new information, or criticize existing information...

From the report, it looked like the panel members (including A. Silver), signed it. Did they not?

Miguel

You are asking something I can't answer. There was a long voting process where each panel member either voted "agree" or "disagree" and before we finished, it was unanimous. Albert's status in that is (to me) unknown at the present, as to whether he voted or not (not all panel members voted, I am pretty sure).

[michiguel]

It's only dangerous for new engines that start out with ca. 3000 elo from the first release.

*EDIT

.. or have a sudden massive increase in strength

It is not just dangerous. It is foolish. You and I both know it don't work like that. To date the highest elo engine I have ever seen on initial release that was legit was Fruit. I may have forgotten something of course. I think Fruit 1.0 beat Zappa 0.82 just about. Might be wrong though. Perhaps someone can confirm.

(By the way, how are you Richard?)



Chris

Ruffian 1.0, probably.

Miguel