The near future of computer chess

[lkaufman]

i have no interest in being an official representative of Ippolit...not sure why you think that.
i am simply being very vocal concerning what i see as the arbitrary, hypocritical, and unfair rating lists blacklisting of 'IvanHoe'.

As for commercial engines selling to testers, you can't have it both ways. Either you are in favor of their doing so, which is a pro-Capitalist position, or you are opposed, in which you favor free versions to testers.

there's very good reason why politicians and others in position of power and influence cannot accept 'gifts'...i'm sure i don't need explain

Regarding the Decembrist name, as I understand it now it is being used as a synonym for Communist, even though the correct term is Octobrist, since "Decembrists" were not anti-Capitalists at all. Is that about right? The use of "Decembrist" suggests you are in favor of restoring a relative of the last Tsar to power in Russia, which I suspect is not the case.

The Ippolit authors obviously have a good understanding of Russian history...
they chose the terms/names...i'm ok with that, and not really interested in debating the semantics.

I think that the authors of Ippolit could greatly increase the chances of Ivanhoe being accepted and rated if they made a statement on their website that they consider Ivanhoe and not Houdini to be the "true" Ippolit. Their faillure to do so leaves the decision up to the testers, and naturally they test the strongest Ippolit, which is Houdini. I certainly don't object to Ivanhoe being rated, but if testers merely consider it an inferior, obsolete version of Ippolit (compared to Houdini), I can see why they don't want to test it. That may not be the original reason for the "blacklisting", but I believe it is the only reason still applicable. The original Ippolit authors can rectify the situation if they so desire.
I doubt very much that Consumer Reports has to pay for the cars they test (I could be wrong though), or in general that testing organizations have to pay for the products they test. That is just common sense. It makes no sense to me to say that a testing organization would favor Rybka (for example) over Ivanhoe (for example), if they get both of them for free. If they had to pay for one and not the other, they might very reasonably refuse to test the one they had to pay for.
As for the naming, I just wanted it to be clear that the Ippolit developers are Communists, and not "Decembrists" in the original meaning -- they are not pushing for restoring the Czar! I think it is their use of this name that caused many to believe they were not really Communists at all, just practical jokers. But I do believe they are really Communists. I take people at their word unless they are known liars.
Finally, I would like your opinion on this question: What is the main reason that Ippolit (or Ivanhoe) is stronger than Rybka 3? I agree with Richard Vida who thought it was a little bit of everything, but do you think there is one MAIN reason for its superiority?

[fern]

The YouTube example is very good for the contrary reasons. If you demand to erase something, they will, but that petition is lost in an ocean of not demanded actions and so is that Youtube exist after all. If you rest all copyrighted materiel from it, youtube collapse.
Is this good? Am I supporting that?
Just like Ed, pointing a fact: copyrights and all those notions of private property on whose ground the concept of stealing comes are becoming obsolete.
A law or rule that cannot be enforced does not exist, neither has sense.
In the field of intellectual property, the avalanche of electronics means to get all has made nonsense of law persecution. You can pursue one or two guys, not millions.
We are becoming kind of collective mind, Mark, these are the first signs... In fact always has been so, but hidden behind the illusion of personality and private property.

Yes, difficult to swallow....

Still waiting a new NOW regards..

Fern

[Laskos]

i have no interest in being an official representative of Ippolit...not sure why you think that.
i am simply being very vocal concerning what i see as the arbitrary, hypocritical, and unfair rating lists blacklisting of 'IvanHoe'.

As for commercial engines selling to testers, you can't have it both ways. Either you are in favor of their doing so, which is a pro-Capitalist position, or you are opposed, in which you favor free versions to testers.

there's very good reason why politicians and others in position of power and influence cannot accept 'gifts'...i'm sure i don't need explain

Regarding the Decembrist name, as I understand it now it is being used as a synonym for Communist, even though the correct term is Octobrist, since "Decembrists" were not anti-Capitalists at all. Is that about right? The use of "Decembrist" suggests you are in favor of restoring a relative of the last Tsar to power in Russia, which I suspect is not the case.

The Ippolit authors obviously have a good understanding of Russian history...
they chose the terms/names...i'm ok with that, and not really interested in debating the semantics.

I think that the authors of Ippolit could greatly increase the chances of Ivanhoe being accepted and rated if they made a statement on their website that they consider Ivanhoe and not Houdini to be the "true" Ippolit. Their faillure to do so leaves the decision up to the testers, and naturally they test the strongest Ippolit, which is Houdini. I certainly don't object to Ivanhoe being rated, but if testers merely consider it an inferior, obsolete version of Ippolit (compared to Houdini), I can see why they don't want to test it. That may not be the original reason for the "blacklisting", but I believe it is the only reason still applicable. The original Ippolit authors can rectify the situation if they so desire.
I doubt very much that Consumer Reports has to pay for the cars they test (I could be wrong though), or in general that testing organizations have to pay for the products they test. That is just common sense. It makes no sense to me to say that a testing organization would favor Rybka (for example) over Ivanhoe (for example), if they get both of them for free. If they had to pay for one and not the other, they might very reasonably refuse to test the one they had to pay for.
As for the naming, I just wanted it to be clear that the Ippolit developers are Communists, and not "Decembrists" in the original meaning -- they are not pushing for restoring the Czar! I think it is their use of this name that caused many to believe they were not really Communists at all, just practical jokers. But I do believe they are really Communists. I take people at their word unless they are known liars.
Finally, I would like your opinion on this question: What is the main reason that Ippolit (or Ivanhoe) is stronger than Rybka 3? I agree with Richard Vida who thought it was a little bit of everything, but do you think there is one MAIN reason for its superiority?

Sorry if I am misinformed, I am not a specialist in Ippos. But you seem to be greatly confused. IvanHoe is not by Norm or anyone "known", it's the last "product" of those anonymous authors. It's their strongest, the most elaborate work. It has nothing to do with Houdini, I don't know why you associate Houdini, Fire, Saros, etc. with these anonymous authors. Houdini CANNOT be associated with the anonymous authors of Ippo series.

I repeat, AFAIK IvanHoe is the original, the last, the strongest, the most elaborate, versatile version of all original, anonymous Ippolit series (Ippolit/Robbolito/Igorrit/IvanHoe) authors. Its neglect by the community is scandalous and could be attributed to commercial interests or even politics. If Ippo series authors are funny with their decembrism/communism, you are not funny at all.

Kai

[lkaufman]

Yes, I am confused. I thought that Ivanhoe was a version of Ippolit modified by Norm, but you are telling me that this is wrong, it was modified by the original Ippolit authors. I thought that Norm had clearly indicated that he was the principal "modifier", not the original Ippolit authors. Norm, can you clarify this for both of us?
If you are correct that Ivanhoe is not by Norm but by the Ippolit authors, then the case for having Ivanhoe on the lists is much stronger.

[Laskos]

Yes, I am confused. I thought that Ivanhoe was a version of Ippolit modified by Norm, but you are telling me that this is wrong, it was modified by the original Ippolit authors. I thought that Norm had clearly indicated that he was the principal "modifier", not the original Ippolit authors. Norm, can you clarify this for both of us?
If you are correct that Ivanhoe is not by Norm but by the Ippolit authors, then the case for having Ivanhoe on the lists is much stronger.

If I am not wrong, the domain of these folks not associated with anything (Norm, Houdini, whatever) is

http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/

You can find there all their stuff and descriptions, if you understand something of their peculiar expressions, I had some fun.

About IvanHoe, for example:

Current (December 26), Anniversary (Revolution)
Brave Musketeer Ivan Skavinsky Skavar attends for the Plans inwith the IvanHoe for the yearing.

is the next year of ivanhoe going to be big? we will make comradeshash and human analysis!
is yusuf going to finish the zog mode? he says it will work for many cpus and also for clsuters!

IvanHoe IS _their_ original, most advanced engine (not anybody's else). It's open source, very strong, multicore, at least the level of Komodo 3 or Critter 1.2, very versatile in its options, has the best endgame bases (and generators) of several kinds. Not including it in lists, not talking about it, seems to me a bit weird.

Kai

[lkaufman]

Actually, a few years ago I read that there was a serious movement in Russia to restore the closest living relative of the Tsar to the throne. Obviously nothing came of it.

[mclane]

russia was always in the hand of dictators. it still is.
first it was the monarchy dictators, ending with the tsar.
then came the bolshevistic dictators.
and until today, its in the hand of the dictator putin.

maybe it will be a democracy when all those dictators have been brought itno prison where they belong. but in the moment i see a very disapointing future for dictatorship-country russia.

[lkaufman]

OK, now I understand. This quote by Norm "when ippolit was 1st released (summer 2009), it was completely unusable on windows, (as well as unstable on Linux), and the code was written in a sort Italian/Albanian dialect
myself (with help from Sentinel), developed and released more than a dozen public betas for testing on Immortal, end of 2009
the final release was RoboLito 0.09 which remains today near the top of all lists, especially single CPU..."

led me to believe that Norm and "Sentinel" were the ones who improved the original Ippolit code to become Ivanhoe. Apparently their contribution was relatively minor, perhaps just compiling different versions and perhaps changing parameters or options, while the substantive code changes were by the original authors. Is that about right? If so then I would agree that Ivanhoe has at least as much right to be tested as Houdini.

[Laskos]

OK, now I understand. This quote by Norm "when ippolit was 1st released (summer 2009), it was completely unusable on windows, (as well as unstable on Linux), and the code was written in a sort Italian/Albanian dialect
myself (with help from Sentinel), developed and released more than a dozen public betas for testing on Immortal, end of 2009
the final release was RoboLito 0.09 which remains today near the top of all lists, especially single CPU..."

led me to believe that Norm and "Sentinel" were the ones who improved the original Ippolit code to become Ivanhoe. Apparently their contribution was relatively minor, perhaps just compiling different versions and perhaps changing parameters or options, while the substantive code changes were by the original authors. Is that about right? If so then I would agree that Ivanhoe has at least as much right to be tested as Houdini.

Right, the main and original sources were written by these funny decembrists/octobrists, independently of what Norm or others were modifying. All Ippolit/Robbolito/Igorrit/IvanHoe original sources are theirs, "revolutionaries", are original, are their development, with IvanHoe being their last and best result for a year already. Houdini has nothing to do with this, in fact they seem to be very bothered that someone stole and sells their code.

IvanHoe is more legit than Rybka, which is a proven clone. IvanHoe is more legit than Houdini, on which one has many hints to direct it to its Ippo origins. More legit than Strelka 2 or 5. In fact, very few arguments can be raised against IvanHoe, and it's hypocritical to say that there are too many versions, the last one, IvanHoe 46, can be tested for months if one wishes so, they do not appear more often than some other engines. Its bitbases and tablebases are original too, with their generators. All this for free and without a need even for a permission to incorporate AFAIK.

Kai

[lkaufman]

Right, the main and original sources were written by these funny decembrists/octobrists, independently of what Norm or others were modifying. All Ippolit/Robbolito/Igorrit/IvanHoe original sources are theirs, "revolutionaries", are original, are their development, with IvanHoe being their last and best result for a year already. Houdini has nothing to do with this, in fact they seem to be very bothered that someone stole and sells their code.

That's very interesting, can you tell me more exactly what they said, or where to read it? What did they expect though, since they did not put any restrictions on the early Ippo releases? That's practically begging someone to take and sell the code with improvements. Surely anyone smart enough to write the Ippo code is smart enough to foresee that this would happen. Perhaps now they'll study the Houdini code, and modify Ivanhoe in the appropriate places to make it as strong as Houdini or stronger. That would be perfectly fair, "turnabout is fair play".

Larry

Kai