A few observations on NNUE/ SF/ FatFritz2 and an alternate scenario.

[MikeB]

What's puzzling is why you think this hypothetical makes what actually happened in reality any better.

The hypothetical is to point out what is being conveniently forgotten - that the NNUE authors (this nothing to do with Fat Fritz) could have gone a different route and decided to get some compensation for their innovation - this would have required them to foresee how groundbreaking it was as well as definitely embark on a brand new engine project .

I began my post saying that I would have done things differently. Why should I contribute code to the #1 open source engine if I can use my innovation to dethrone it and make money in the process. Sure its a challenge but I have an edge.

It is incredibly hypocritical to disparage some one creating their own network which (bring it to court if you want) and selling it for money, when your engine is #1 ONLY because NNUE implementation was gifted as a POC.
As far as Fat Fritz 2 "controversy" - it is absolutely not one. If you think its in violation of GPL you can challenge in court. It is also perfectly moral - and the real reason for this anger is because someone cleverly figured out how to make money using open source software chess engine and a new plugin neural network.

The larger picture I am trying to paint is nothing to do with chess engines itself but the fact that there are too many people think that mediocrity and collaboration should trump meritocracy.

Takeaways:

1) You are ignorant of the context of the context in which NNUE was invented (for Shogi engines that were using Stockfish's search, that is they were benefiting from Stockfish and the port of NNUE to chess was contributing back).

+1

2) You have a hard time comprehending people that contribute to innovation for free. You love money too much to fathom doing so.

+1

3) You are trolling or badly mentally challenged to call criticism of Fat Fritz hypocritical, your explanation as to why it would be is nonsensical. It follows an honest conversation with you is impossible. The purpose of this post henceforth is not to change your mind in any way but to bring enjoyment to other sane people.

+1

4) You think making money through plagiarism and deceit is great. As long as it makes money it's "clever" in your greedy mind.

+1

5) Using your words more appropriately, you believe the mediocrity of greedy copy-pasters should trump the merit of people who innovate.

We've got a champion.

+1

5 - zip shutout ...

[Dann Corbit]

FWIW, I think FF does not break any SF agreement.
I also think that a net is probably just a table of numbers and a table of numbers cannot be copyrighted.
But I can certainly be wrong about both of those things.
I would not want to test either one in a court of law.

Interestingly, your opinion on whether FF breaks SF's license and on whether a net is copyrightable are the exact opposite of mine! However, both of our positions would have the same consequence: one would be entitled to copy FF's net (again, I am not advocating that anybody actually does that). This is why, although we had a big discussion about these two points, and good people had honest differences about both of them, the overwhelming majority of the people in the discussion do actually fall into the "FF's net could legally be copied" superset: not many people thought that both FF did not break SF's license AND that a net is copyrightable.

Then again, "nine guys thought it was probably legal" does not make it legal. It is or it isn't and i am the cautious sort, personally.

[towforce]

With respect to nets, the general consensus by people more expert than me, it is generally considered that weights are discovered and hence not derived from a creative process that would lead to copyright. However, this area is evolving and we have already seen some changes ...
https://images.law.com/contrib/content/ ... 9_0325.pdf
read : "Alexa, Will I Be Able to Patent My
AI Technology This Year?"

There are no test cases right now, but I cited an article in which legal experts were consulted. Their opinion was that the closest existing precedent is that if person A (pa) commissions a work of art, the copyright for that work of art then belongs to pa, not the artist who actually made it. By analogy, if I commission a piece of software to generate some art, then I would get ownership of the copyright over that art.

Having said all that, we might soon find ourselves in a world in which AI can generate any amount of high quality art at negligible cost: under these circumstances, the laws of supply and demand would indicate that the value of copyright over art would then fall to almost nothing.

[frcha]

What's puzzling is why you think this hypothetical makes what actually happened in reality any better.

The hypothetical is to point out what is being conveniently forgotten - that the NNUE authors (this nothing to do with Fat Fritz) could have gone a different route and decided to get some compensation for their innovation - this would have required them to foresee how groundbreaking it was as well as definitely embark on a brand new engine project .

I began my post saying that I would have done things differently. Why should I contribute code to the #1 open source engine if I can use my innovation to dethrone it and make money in the process. Sure its a challenge but I have an edge.

It is incredibly hypocritical to disparage some one creating their own network which (bring it to court if you want) and selling it for money, when your engine is #1 ONLY because NNUE implementation was gifted as a POC.
As far as Fat Fritz 2 "controversy" - it is absolutely not one. If you think its in violation of GPL you can challenge in court. It is also perfectly moral - and the real reason for this anger is because someone cleverly figured out how to make money using open source software chess engine and a new plugin neural network.

The larger picture I am trying to paint is nothing to do with chess engines itself but the fact that there are too many people think that mediocrity and collaboration should trump meritocracy.

Takeaways:

1) You are ignorant of the context of the context in which NNUE was invented (for Shogi engines that were using Stockfish's search, that is they were benefiting from Stockfish and the port of NNUE to chess was contributing back).

2) You have a hard time comprehending people that contribute to innovation for free. You love money too much to fathom doing so.

3) You are trolling or badly mentally challenged to call criticism of Fat Fritz hypocritical, your explanation as to why it would be is nonsensical. It follows an honest conversation with you is impossible. The purpose of this post henceforth is not to change your mind in any way but to bring enjoyment to other sane people.

4) You think making money through plagiarism and deceit is great. As long as it makes money it's "clever" in your greedy mind.

5) Using your words more appropriately, you believe the mediocrity of greedy copy-pasters should trump the merit of people who innovate.

We've got a champion.

1.) Nope. I know what actually happened but it could have been different in which case apparently the creators of this new commercial engine (NNUE guys) would have been despised by you.
2) Nope.
3:) You cannot even comprehend that Fat Fritz is only a side line to the main point that Open Source is not very beneficial to developers who innovate. The GPL prevents you from making money but allows big corporations to make money from your work.
4:)There is no plagiarism since they have clearly stated that it is SF with a new network. It is indeed clever to be able to make money from Open Source since even the original authors cannot - the logic is sound - the new network is NOT part of GPL - the software is also not. only the UCI engine is GPL. Note to future innovators - don't go GPL.
5:) git clone = open source . A million forks 0 usability - very little testing - yes? You really think mediocrity is selling here ? Do you even know the work to create FF2 ?
Finally, EVERYONE knows its using SF with diff. NN- the deception by ChessBase is very little compared to the deception/confusion in differences btw. Fritz/Chessbase interfaces.

[towforce]

...the main point [is] that Open Source is not very beneficial to developers who innovate.

Thanks to open source developers, a lot of people get to use software which improves their lives, and big software companies are forced to lower their prices to more reasonable levels.

Here's some valuable information: the more you make other people's better, the more the universe will make your life better!

Here's an item whose value most people underestimate: purpose!

[AndrewGrant]

...the main point [is] that Open Source is not very beneficial to developers who innovate.

Thanks to open source developers, a lot of people get to use software which improves their lives, and big software companies are forced to lower their prices to more reasonable levels.

Here's some valuable information: the more you make other people's better, the more the universe will make your life better!

Here's an item whose value most people underestimate: purpose!

NNUE would not exist without Open Source programs. Be thankful to all those who power this hobby.

[cpeters]

@frca

The GPL prevents you from making money but allows big corporations to make money from your work.

As always, there's more evil. The BSD-licensed stuff. Wipe it!
Bring your ramblings/considerations directly to them beautiful ******* please (you'll be heard, I'd guess):

news:comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc

or

misc@openbsd.org


Greetings

[Dann Corbit]

Lots of GPL software is used to make money, often by the original writers of the tools.
Generally speaking, the money to be made is not in selling the software (which is free, after all).
It is in selling support.

That is how most of the Linux vendors do it.

It is also used in hosted cloud projects, where the value paid for is the maintenance and upkeep and having someone else pay for the infrastructure.

[connor_mcmonigle]

...
3:) You cannot even comprehend that Fat Fritz is only a side line to the main point that Open Source is not very beneficial to developers who innovate. The GPL prevents you from making money but allows big corporations to make money from your work.

Was this supposed to be a rebuttal? You've just demonstrated Alayan's primary point: you're so caught up on money and motivated by greed that you can't even conceive of an explanation as to why someone would choose to share their software projects and related innovations freely to everyone. Computer chess is, for most, a hobby from which they derive personal enjoyment. People choose to distribute their software freely under the GPL/other FOSS licenses in the hopes that it might prove useful to others. They're effectively donating the results of their efforts to others.

Your logic is equivalent to:
"Why do donors donate money to charitable organizations? Clearly, donating money doesn't financially benefit the donors" /s.

4:)There is no plagiarism since they have clearly stated that it is SF with a new network. It is indeed clever to be able to make money from Open Source since even the original authors cannot - the logic is sound - the new network is NOT part of GPL - the software is also not. only the UCI engine is GPL. Note to future innovators - don't go GPL.

Again, you're so caught up on money that you think anything which makes money is necessarily clever. Is taking food from a food bank and then selling it "clever" as well?

There's nothing remotely clever about conning low information consumers into purchasing Stockfish with a different name. If it was so "clearly stated" that FF2 was just SF with a different network, why did so many individuals in the comments section of the Lichess article exposing FF2 state that they felt mislead by ChessBase's marketing? ChessBase literally marketed FF2 as "The new number one engine by Albert Silver".

"Note to future innovators - don't go GPL." -> "Note to prospective donors - don't donate to food banks."

5:) git clone = open source . A million forks 0 usability - very little testing - yes? You really think mediocrity is selling here ? Do you even know the work to create FF2 ?

I do happen to know the work involved in creating a strong neural network for Stockfish having done so. I'm guessing you don't given the above. It takes very little work and is so easy that even someone with very rudimentary knowledge of ML/computer science such as Albert Silver could figure it out.

Finally, EVERYONE knows its using SF with diff. NN- the deception by ChessBase is very little compared to the deception/confusion in differences btw. Fritz/Chessbase interfaces.

"EVERYONE", seriously? There's loads of evidence to suggest this was not the case. Just look at the comments section of the Lichess article exposing FF2.

[gaard]

What's puzzling is why you think this hypothetical makes what actually happened in reality any better.

The hypothetical is to point out what is being conveniently forgotten - that the NNUE authors (this nothing to do with Fat Fritz) could have gone a different route and decided to get some compensation for their innovation - this would have required them to foresee how groundbreaking it was as well as definitely embark on a brand new engine project .

I began my post saying that I would have done things differently. Why should I contribute code to the #1 open source engine if I can use my innovation to dethrone it and make money in the process. Sure its a challenge but I have an edge.

It is incredibly hypocritical to disparage some one creating their own network which (bring it to court if you want) and selling it for money, when your engine is #1 ONLY because NNUE implementation was gifted as a POC.
As far as Fat Fritz 2 "controversy" - it is absolutely not one. If you think its in violation of GPL you can challenge in court. It is also perfectly moral - and the real reason for this anger is because someone cleverly figured out how to make money using open source software chess engine and a new plugin neural network.

The larger picture I am trying to paint is nothing to do with chess engines itself but the fact that there are too many people think that mediocrity and collaboration should trump meritocracy.

Takeaways:

1) You are ignorant of the context of the context in which NNUE was invented (for Shogi engines that were using Stockfish's search, that is they were benefiting from Stockfish and the port of NNUE to chess was contributing back).

2) You have a hard time comprehending people that contribute to innovation for free. You love money too much to fathom doing so.

3) You are trolling or badly mentally challenged to call criticism of Fat Fritz hypocritical, your explanation as to why it would be is nonsensical. It follows an honest conversation with you is impossible. The purpose of this post henceforth is not to change your mind in any way but to bring enjoyment to other sane people.

4) You think making money through plagiarism and deceit is great. As long as it makes money it's "clever" in your greedy mind.

5) Using your words more appropriately, you believe the mediocrity of greedy copy-pasters should trump the merit of people who innovate.

We've got a champion.

1.) Nope. I know what actually happened but it could have been different in which case apparently the creators of this new commercial engine (NNUE guys) would have been despised by you.
2) Nope.
3:) You cannot even comprehend that Fat Fritz is only a side line to the main point that Open Source is not very beneficial to developers who innovate. The GPL prevents you from making money but allows big corporations to make money from your work.
4:)There is no plagiarism since they have clearly stated that it is SF with a new network. It is indeed clever to be able to make money from Open Source since even the original authors cannot - the logic is sound - the new network is NOT part of GPL - the software is also not. only the UCI engine is GPL. Note to future innovators - don't go GPL.
5:) git clone = open source . A million forks 0 usability - very little testing - yes? You really think mediocrity is selling here ? Do you even know the work to create FF2 ?
Finally, EVERYONE knows its using SF with diff. NN- the deception by ChessBase is very little compared to the deception/confusion in differences btw. Fritz/Chessbase interfaces.

Finally, EVERYONE knows its using SF with diff. NN- the deception by ChessBase is very little compared to the deception/confusion in differences btw. Fritz/Chessbase interfaces.

This statement rings as true as the claim that "chess players find [FF] incredibly useful", which is to say, not true at all, since you provide nothing to support this claim. It is staggering then, that you acknowledge the deceptive and confusing (as you call them) statements by ChessBase, in an attempt to minimize them, as their apologist.