Critter 1.2 update + new homepage

[IWB]

Hi Marco,

well you've gotten your way...it's been banned from most major lists, cannot enter tournaments, etc.

I don't know about tournaments but I have a clear idea why fire is not so extensively tested on the public lists (with some exceptions like the very nice list of Frank).

The reality, crude and simple, is that Fire is not so much more strong than the engine family to which it belongs. Houdini it is and I guess this is the _only_ reason why, after a lot of troubles, finally it get started to be tested. But Fire is not, it is still well among the big and happy family of the various Ippo, Robbo, Ivanhoe and the likes. If you are able to push it above 50 ELO from its origins then I guess you'll be tested....

I just want to give some simple reasons why there is no other Litto engine in my list. (oficialy)
1. I refuse to test and include many very similar versions of the same engine (Stockfish as an example!) at the same time into my list. Of course I have to check what version is the best one (and I do) but to include the nearly same engine several time is just distorting the rating of the original engines.
2. I do not run public beta tests! If I would have to test all the Littos and there releases I couldn't test anything else (Thanks to Houdini (!) the frequency of releases is down a little) The weekly release of new compiles cant be tested by the author and I am not willing to make the programmers work (at least not for everyone)
3. As you said, with the exception of Houdini, none of ll the Littos is able to really seperate from the latest Robbolito 0.9 (which is no longer available at the same place as before ... that is telling a story as well, and 0.9 was "just" 20 Elos better than the first relese 0.85x I think which was able to run smoothly) All of them are going up and down 20 Elo for a year now without a real improvment in Elo numbers.
4. Some reputations of the compilers have a long history of cloning. As long as others are simply better programmers (as they improve something) I do not see a reason to please these compilers by giving more notice than nessesary.

In short: The best Litto-derivate (with a known programmer) is enough for a list.

Bye
Ingo


PS: Of course there is a chance that I have more "Littos" in the IPON, but unfortunately I am not a visionary.

[Chan Rasjid]

funny, i guess I always thought (perhaps rather naively) that the 'rating lists' were there
to provide a public service to casual users by providing information...complete and unbiased information?

rating list provide only a rating; but they they don't rate anything about themselves.

unfortunately, it's clear these entrenched 'establishment' lists are pursuing an agenda...
deciding themselves for the masses:

all of us have an agenda...and so do they.

what is 'legitimate' and what is not...
what is a 'clone' and what is not...
which engines are of the same family and which are not...?

Extremely boring things to talk about.

A programming question -
If search returns a mate score, why is that searching deeper still returns that same mate score?

and these are non-programmers/amateurs (often w/ little or no expertise) making their best guess!
(or simply abusing their entrenched influence and power?)

Rather too complicated for me.

For ex:
Rybka is now fairly certainly known to be derived from Fruit!

yet Fruit 2.1, etc. etc. is still on the 'lists'?
(along with Rybka, GambitFruit, Toga, Cyclone. etc.)?

can you (or Don) please explain this discrepency?

Oh Rybka ! It is a brand name and people love it.
... and the list goes on and on...

Norman, you made a grave mistake on day one! When you decided to take ippolit and do a derivative program, YOU SHOULD NOT TELL. You should have done the 'acknowledgement' thing giving credits to ...Bob Hyatt, Richard Vida, Don daily, Marco Polo... prophet Jonah... and obfuscate the codes that obfuscate the resulting binary (this shouldn't be a problem to you). Don't ever answer to any accusation or suggestion that yours is a clone..
and then you might have got your Fire acknowledge as a great program.

Also a little humility goes a long way. Never say your program is extremely strong as the gods don't like competitions!

Now it is too late; just add this to your list of mistakes that make a person wiser in the ways of the world.

Rasjid

[Dann Corbit]

funny, i guess I always thought (perhaps rather naively) that the 'rating lists' were there to provide casual users with information...complete and unbiased information?

[\quote]

It seems to me that ratings lists are generated by volunteers, for free, for people to do what they want with. These volunteers do this because they enjoy it (as a hobby) and enjoy sharing it. In the same way, many engines are developed for free because the developer enjoys it (as a hobby) and shared with the public to do what they wish with it (within certain legal guidelines). The usual and appropriate rule in both these cases is: those that do the work make the rules. The rating list contributors should maintain their lists in whatever way is most enjoyable to them. After all, it is there hobby, not a job! What they test and hiw they test it may affect how much attention there list gets, but so be it. The same is true for free engine developers within the confines of the legal system. Some of the development decisions may annoy others, whether it leaving in bugs, leaving out feautes, making the engine to weak, or reusing the code of others, as long as its legal (and the engine developer or rating list contributor is honest) its really up to the person doing the work what they want to do, and up to the public what they want to do with the product.

Taken from this perspective, its hard to see what the fuss is about. The rating list folks can do what they want, and as long as they are not faking results or something (which seems amazingly unlikely) there is nothing to complain about. You can develop your engine as you want, and there is nothng for them to complain about. If for some reason its important to you to have your engine in some rating list, then it is up to you to negotiate the terms with the keepers of that list that woukd make them willing to devote their time and energy to making that happen. If you are not willing to do that, that is your decision.

-Sam

sorry Sam (and Don),
i disagree completely with the "it's their list and they are volunteers" cop-out.

when you are in a position of power and influence, you have a responsibility to exercise it judiciously...
i.e. fairly and in an unbiased manner

I suppose that they believe they are doing that.

As to power and influence...

We are grown men moving little wooden horsies around on cardboard squares.

I am not sure how power and influence fits in here. We're not deciding the outcome of a global conflict or halting genocide in some warring nation.

[kranium]

4. Some reputations of the compilers have a long history of cloning. As long as others are simply better programmers (as they improve something) I do not see a reason to please these compilers by giving more notice than nessesary.

well this appears to be a pot-shot at me...

Ingo-
if you really believe that all i do is 'compile' then you are illustrating perfectly your complete and utter ignorance in the matter...

the unending release of various IvanHoes on Immortal was the result of 'compilers'...
with which i had nothing to do...

Fire itself has 'improved' tremendously, i.e stability, features, and strength, etc....
perhaps not as much ELO as you judge necessary to distinguish itself to qualify for your holy 'list'...
but that's just a result of a 'narrow minded' and 'judgmental' perspective on what constitutes improvement.

lets' be honest...excluding Fire, IvanHoe, etc., is just a form of bias and punishment.
(an abuse of power and responsibility to the public interest for complete and unfettered information)

typical 'good old boy' behaviour...

[Dann Corbit]

Consider how you might feel if you spent 3 or 4 years designing and building something at your job, then just before it was finished you are fired. Someone else takes over the project and claims success and almost complete credit for your work. You did the hard part, they did very little but get the credit and an enormous bonus for a job well done! Doesn't that seem offensive?

well Don, I can certainly relate to that...

i've been working really hard on the Ippolit source code continuously for 2-3 years now...
all my free time...
i have ported virtually every release beginning w/ Ippolit 0.83 over to windows,
fixed bugs, created stability, added features, improved strength, created RobboLito 0.085g3,
and many more release...etc., etc.
and much code from Sentinel and I has found it's way back to IvanHoe...the # 3 engine in the world!
(if you don't have you head in the sand, like some)

but what do i find recognized as legitimate on the 'rating lists'?
Rybka (based on Fruit)
Houdini - almost certainly beginning w/ (cloned from) RobboLito 0.085g3
Komoda (using ideas from Ippolit/RobbolIto/Igorrit/IvanHoe)
Stockfish (using ideas from Ippolit/RobbolIto/Igorrit/IvanHoe)
etc.
etc.

but Robbolito, IvanHoe, Iggorit, and Fire are banned from tournaments and rating lists, they are illegitimate 'clones'!?

what a farce!

Yes, of course. The above list could be exactly as you describe it (Though I realize you mean to be sarcastic).
Or it could be reversed.
Or it could be a mixture.
Or it could be none of the above.

In the end, people are going to do what they want to do.
If it is incredibly difficult to obtain justice in a court of law unless you have an incredible pile of money, it will be even more formidable to achieve justice in some hobby venture where actions are driven by whatever people consider to be fun.
Personally, I do not care for any of the mock trials that take place, when people form final conclusions as to the outcome.
But my opinions is no better than that of anyone else.

[kranium]

I suppose that they believe they are doing that.
As to power and influence...
We are grown men moving little wooden horsies around on cardboard squares.
I am not sure how power and influence fits in here. We're not deciding the outcome of a global conflict or halting genocide in some warring nation.

yes i'm also unsure why such passions arise over a simple? game...
clearly there must be a lot at stake concerning recognition, self-esteem, and achievement for people to become some condescending and judgmental

[Dann Corbit]

I suppose that they believe they are doing that.
As to power and influence...
We are grown men moving little wooden horsies around on cardboard squares.
I am not sure how power and influence fits in here. We're not deciding the outcome of a global conflict or halting genocide in some warring nation.

yes i'm also unsure why such passions arise over a simple? game...
clearly there must be a lot at stake concerning recognition, self-esteem, and achievement for people to become some condescending and judgmental

That's why I think we should not take ourselves too seriously.
We're not curing cancer.
We're not feeding the starving.
We're not housing the homeless.
We're only having a bit of fun.
Why get our buns into a big, tight knot over it?

[Dann Corbit]

Congrats for the new release Richard!

Now there are 4 engines in IPON list with almost equal strength:

Rybka 4 2954
Komodo 2952
Critter 2948
Stockfish 2942

Only Houdini has a clear lead.

Cheers,
Joona

I fully second Joona, it is impressive to see 3 engines on par with Rybka 4 when until a couple of years ago the previous version Rybka 3 was practically unchallenged at the top.

Publishing of Ippo sources for sure has greatly changed the landscape in the last two years and I like to think that also SF has contributed a little in helping the fast raise of today's very strong engines.

Congratulations Richard !

yes, the raping and plundering of Ippolit source code is nearly complete now.
most top engines have benefited sufficiently.
in addition, top program authors have managed to discredit it enough to keep it off most major rating lists.
yes, job well done...
pats on the back, a big thanks to StockFish!?, and congrats all around!

I must say I agree with Norman on this!

How is it that the author of Komodo can openly admit to looking at using ideas of Ippolits in his engine and yet the ippolits are not allowed on rating lists??

It's stupid not to use good ideas in a chess program, regardless of where they came from. I'm not sure ANYONE here has ever said anything to the contrary - but certainly I have not.

I am no fan of cloning or derivatives. I have yet to use Houdini or Fire etc. etc. (I used Robbolito in Scid for android and then deleted because I felt bad)

But again Norman is correct about the rating list hypocrisy!! If Houdini and Komodo can be be on the lists then so can Fire and Robbolito!

There are 2 issues. The first I won't argue about, but it's WHETHER these programs are just versions of other programs. You can refer to other threads and have several days of enjoyable reading if you want to get yourself all stirred up again.

However the second and primary issue is something that you have to agree with if you have a scientific mind at all. Most of the people here who don't understand it are probably non-technical users who love computer chess but do not understand statistics or just are not thinking about things from the point of view of fairness to the authors providing these great programs. Here is how it works:

If you have a tournament with say 9 programs competing that are all the same strength (this point doesn't matter but makes it a little easier to understand) then each program has about 1/9 of winning the tournament. Let's say that my program Komodo is one of the players in this tournament. Let's say the tournament director says, "we need 10 programs so nobody has to have a bye." So I tell the TD I have an experimental version of Komodo that can play in the 10th spot. It's basically Komodo with a few minor changes and plays about the same strength as any of the other programs.

So now there are 2 Komodo's and 8 other programs. The odds that ONE version of Komodo will win the tournament is now about twice that of any other program. Now if the other 8 authors decide to walk out of the tournament would you blame them?

This is why tournaments that are well organized do not let program authors enter multiple versions in their tournaments, even if there is a fee and they are willing to pay it for each program.

Let's say that Houdart decides to release 20 different versions of Houdini, and he makes up 20 fake names for the programs and 20 fake author names and presents them anonymously to the world. Let's also say that he uses this technique to get others to test his changes for him, so really each one is different version of Houdini, but it is in fact Houdini.

Now you look on the rating lists to select a program to either purchase (or get free) for your gitfed nephew who wants to become a Grandmaster. Number 21 on the list is a program called Stockfish 2.2 and you think, why should I care about some crappy program that is number 21 when I have this huge selection of great programs that are top 10?

There are many who argue, who cares? Why not just put every program out there and stop obsessing over this? My answer is that if you really believe this makes any sense, then why can't I release many versions of Komodo and I will give them different names if people are stupid enough to think that makes them different and unique? Just to keep them happy I can make them somewhat different and make some a few ELO weaker than others. That's the situation we have with ippo, robbo, firebird, and any number of very close derivatives.

There is also the expression, "don't bite the hand the feeds you" and this applies. There are a lot of original programs our there and most of them are labors of love and they are given away for free despite the fact that they involved huge amounts of effort on the part of the authors. Computer chess is a like a drug for many of us and the program authors are you "suppliers." Some of the "suppliers" are very competitive and want to have a top 10 program so the gross unfairness of some top program essentially getting to claim several spots on the top 10 list, or playing in a tournament where a very good but not best program has no chance whatsoever because someone else gets to have several entries (like 3 or 4 ippo clones) in the tournament is not only grossly unfair, but has a negative impact on computer chess in general as it diminishes a lot of very fine programs that actually are the real McCoys.

Hi Don,

1)

I never said it was stupid to use good ideas. But considering how much you protest against the alleged clones (one of the reasons I really like you by the way!), it does seem rather hypocritical to use ideas from those same engines. Sorry but that IS how it is.

To use code without permission is copyright violation.
There is literally nothing wrong with using an algorithm unless there is a patent.

2)

Yes ONLY ONE version of an engine should be enrolled in a tournament. I agree with this 100%. BUT Norman (and now I) are referring to ratings lists.

Check any list and you will Rybka 2, 3 and 4. Houdini 1.3 and 1.5.
Junior 10 and Junior 12. Need I go on?

And if you still want to debate your now flawed "one version" theory then go ahead and pick Robolitto as a Single processor version and then either Fire, Ivanhoe OR Ippolit as the MP version. And that solves the Multiple Version problem for lists (which doesn't really exist anyway).

If Houdini is allowed on the ratings lists AND Komodo with ideas from the very engines you railed against is allowed on the lists, then at least one of "those" engines should be on the ratings lists.

And remember I don't LIKE or USE the clones or derivatives. (partly based on your arguments, I may add).

But I don't like hypocrisy and that is what this smells like to me.

Anyone is free to form their own rating list and they are also free to include any engines that they choose.

We are all free to ignore or adore those same rating lists.

I think you will find that everyone knows the relative strength of all the engines despite the cries of "I'm being REPRESSED! I'm being REPRESSED!"

I think that what the outcries are really all about is social acceptance. All the other cries about injustice and hiding information are a big bowl of hockey pucks.

As for being accepted, that is a function of social norms. I think that when the programmers act responsibly, they are accepted. When they fail to act responsibly, then they are shunned.

It may just be an appearance of failing to act respectably as well, but those sorts of things are easily repaired.

I am reminded of a proverb:
(Psalm 26:4) 4 I have not sat with men of untruth; And with those who hide what they are I do not come in.

That proverb bites in all directions, and over time, the flashlight will probably illuminate all of the dark corners.

IMO-YMMV

[kranium]

Norman, you made a grave mistake on day one! When you decided to take ippolit and do a derivative program, YOU SHOULD NOT TELL. You should have done the 'acknowledgement' thing giving credits to ...Bob Hyatt, Richard Vida, Don daily, Marco Polo... prophet Jonah... and obfuscate the codes that obfuscate the resulting binary (this shouldn't be a problem to you). Don't ever answer to any accusation or suggestion that yours is a clone..
and then you might have got your Fire acknowledge as a great program.
Rasjid

sadly, it appears you are absolutely right...

[S.Taylor]

Hi,

Critter 1.2 is available for win32/64, linux and android platforms.
It also got a new home: http://www.vlasak.biz/critter/

Thanks to Emil Vlasák for web hosting.

Richard

Android?
Very nice. I think i might get a reasonably decent android soon. I was not succesful with Blackberry or Iphone.
It will be my first smatphone that i get up and running. (I mean, in London, it is now very easy, only needing only a 3 network simcard with inexpensive monthly top up. No subscription necesary. In Israel, MAYbe i can get it configured with hebrew, which is necesary, there there is also monthly pay as you go arrangements, but when in the USA, there, I DON'T know if there is available pay-as-you-go. IS there?)

At any rate, it's nice to know that there is a decent chess program i can use. Surely a whole lot better and stronger than the strongest chess program available for any handheld device (Palm etc.) of 5 years ago! Correct?