In the post below, Cimiotti admits that a version of Rybka that was inspected by the ICGA played in the WCCC:Rebel wrote: The big question is, provided Vas will speak right now, would that be of any help?
By Lukas Cimiotti (*****) [de] Date 2007-08-19 19:36
Rybka - 2.3.2a MP x64 gets a reasonable boost from going from 4 to 8 cores. Rybka is continously beeing improoved, so the version that will (hopefully) be playing in Mexico isn't ready yet - it won't be publicly available, but i think, multiprocessor efficiency will not be improoved until then. Btw. WCCC in Amsterdam was run the first day using Rybka 2.3.2 (with TBs and hash size hardcoded - no other modification), from the second day it was 2.3.2a - the version that was released later to the public.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ;hl=wccc
In the post below Cimiotti gives an absurd excuse for Rajlich refusing to provide the source code. The excuse is absurd partly because the Rybka - 2.3.2a code is years out of date and contains nothing of commercial value and partly because the source code could have been released to a secure source who was not a competitor.
By Lukas Cimiotti (*****) [de] Date 2011-08-14 10:28
Vas and I discussed whether or not he should give source code to the ICGA. He really didn't like that idea. My idea was removing all comments and maybe changing all names of variables to make the code harder to understand. But as the guys that disassembled Rybka hadn't understood several parts of the code, we agreed it's safer to not give anything to our competitors.
So Vas only defended himself by saying: I did nothing wrong.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... hl=source
In addition and even more astonishingly, Rajlich refused to release Rybka 1 code.
Rybka 1 code is even more out of date
Rybka 1 code is widely available in the form of Strelka
Rybka 1 code could also have been released to a secure source, even if his claim that Strelka was a reverse engineered Rybka 1 was a lie.
If Rajlich speaks “right now” and backs up his comments with the release of what is now code with no commercial value whatsoever he will not only "receive a listening ear", he will instantly win the argument, leaving a multitude of experts with egg all over their faces. His continual refusal to do that and his pathetic excuses speak volumes.Rebel wrote: Bottom line, will he receive a listening ear ?
