The near future of computer chess

[bob]

If you want to work on app servers, you can join an existing project like Tomcat. If you want to work on compilers, you can join the GCC project and contribute improvements. If you want to work on operating systems you can become a Linux comitter. I don't think anyone would consider you a second-rate programmer, or not an innovative one, because you were doing this on an existing foundation, vs. starting your own compiler project (for example). In fact these projects wouldn't have existed and advanced without a lot of dedicated contributors.

(Most commercial closed-sourced development is also like this. If you are in an early stage startup, you get to code stuff from scratch. But otherwise, you are probably fixing bugs and adding features to something that's existing, or at least building an add on of some sort that has to work with existing software).

So why is computer chess different?

--Jon

This ground has been covered over and over, but I'll remind you that we are talking about plagiarism. The FSF which STANDS for freedom strongly disagrees with you on this. It's not ok to plagiarize. Moral society has some bounds on what is acceptable and this is not.

Ed's arguments are just another way to justify plagiarism and dishonesty - by denying what is actually happening and trying to make it seems modern and new - but theft is very old and ancient.

If you want to work on an EXISTING project and share credit and be constrained by their rules, then there is nothing wrong with that. That's not what we are talking about here and nobody is going to care if some chess project is started where everyone is free to contribute. I'm all for that.

There are hundreds if not thousands of chess programs and this is not like compiler technology where there are only 3 or 4 compilers getting 99% of the usage. The compiler is a tool that we all need and there is no real need for incredible diversity or interesting variations. In fact the goal for compilers is that they should all just work the same. It makes huge sense to work together on projects like that.

Ed is suggesting that it's just plain ok to take anybody's program as a starting point and start your own chess project from that, WITHOUT any regard to the rule of law or the licensing or the feelings of those who did not want their own work plagiarized.

If I came into your home and starting taking stuff out and then attacked you for not being willing to share wouldn't you fight back? I cannot understand the lack of compassion that Ed and others have for Fabien and his hard work and a complete disregard for how HE feels about it. To me this is the height of immorality - it's rape. Now you and others are arguing that everyone should just be entitled to rape and that it's just the way of the world and just be declared acceptable.

Don,

If you don't have taken the time to read my article then why use such strong language use? I don't get it.

I am saying CC is in a transition period, classic old vs new generation conflict (parents vs teenagers) that always is won by the new generation because time is on their side and therefore I am trying to create AWARENESS............ Huston we have a problem.

The time will come and is near the new generation of chess programmers grown up with access to open source will give the old generation the middle finger because you (pre-internet generation) wants them to reinvent dozens of wheels.

If you had read my page then you would have realized the tone setting is concern, concern about the future of fair play and a call for discussion.'

Now read that page and call me dishonest after that again.

If, as you say, the "new generation" of chess programmers want to participate with copies of the same source, with minor tweaks, eventually, they will become the majority and control the tournament rules. I personally do not believe that will happen, because for a competition to _last_ there has to be a challenge and a reward. Some reported, when the bicycle was invented, that the end of the foot-race was nigh. Didn't happen. There are bicycle races. And foot-races. Not inter-mingled. There might be a "clone-tournament" if anyone gets interested enough. But I doubt the existing model will ever be replaced, because it meets both requirements. It offers a challenge that copying source does not, and it offers a reward of personal satisfaction to see something YOU created do well...

Very much like building your own drag-racer as opposed to buying one off of Ebay.

[fern]

Yes, sad. No a hint of sense of humor in you.
SAD
Have you ever thought how insignificant is all this business about chess computers?
Or how insignificant our opinions in order to stop world trends that are overwhelmingly destroying any sense of property as an individual right?
You are all trying to stop a tsunami with a finger.....

Fern

[Terry McCracken]

Yes, sad. No a hint of sense of humor in you.
SAD
Have you ever thought how insignificant is all this business about chess computers?
Or how insignificant our opinions in order to stop world trends that are overwhelmingly destroying any sense of property as an individual right?
You are all trying to stop a tsunami with a finger.....

Fern

And you have your's up your @ss.

[fern]

Man, not necessary to fall in those expressions. I have been always friendly with you. I expect a minimal reciprocation.

my best
Fern

[Terry McCracken]

Man, not necessary to fall in those expressions. I have been always friendly with you. I expect a minimal reciprocation.

my best
Fern

You have??

Come on.....attacking me when you know I'm right, and if it's so trivial to you why do you justify stealing??? You guys have kept it up over the past five years. Why don't you let it go and move on???

[fern]

Where should I move?
Ok, terry, not useful to post with you.
I move from that at least

[Terry McCracken]

Where should I move?
Ok, terry, not useful to post with you.
I move from that at least

Brilliant....Justify what you like. You feel the new paradigm forces people to take credit for the work of others. We will never agree on that ever.

If you've been ripped off as you claim as an author then look at your legal options.

[Rebel]

If, as you say, the "new generation" of chess programmers want to participate with copies of the same source, with minor tweaks, eventually, they will become the majority and control the tournament rules.

I offered 2 brainstorm ideas to cover that.

Subject: Ippolit and related freeware source code.

Advantages:

1. No more hypocrisy among the established programmers condemning a programmer and in the meantime take from his legacy. They can now freely take.

2. New programmers can start from freeware sources and recognized as a valid engine as long as they contribute a substantial elo improvement such as Houdini.

3. New programmers can safely come out of the closet without the risk being teared into pieces.

4. Restore the WCCC into its old glory. A real world championship can be held again.

Keyword: transparency.

I would wish the ICGA to do that but sadly the time is not ripe for that. It's to hope the gap the ICGA has left is not picked up by some ego guy like Iljoemzjinov who had no moral problem to play chess with Kadhafi.

[hgm]

I yet have to see a workable idea for a 'derivatives contest'. How do you want to prevent me from entering 100 infinitesimally altered Ippolits, to increase my chances?

[hgm]

Well, that is what I mean. Of course I would not enter the 100 engines under my own name. I have many nephews...

It is always easy to find a 'front' that would claim the infinitesimal change, while the shared true strength-providing change is all the same and made by me (and the original 300+ code of course simply downloaded).

One-author-one-program is just trivial to subvert if would not be applied to all, or at least the major part of the code.