Time to rethink what Vasik Rajlich has done?

[hgm]

Wasn't Rybka the reigning worldchampion when 'the problem started'?

And yes, it was harsh. That is why I called it 'overreacting'. But that is to be expected when you annoy your judges.

[chrisw]

Cooperating = providing source code, as he was obliged to
Failing to cooperate = failing to provide source code.

It is not really rocket science. It is also not something that is easy to smother in smoke.

You are seriously misleading the readers here.
ICGA never asked Vas to provide any source code.

Here are the transcripts of the Levy-Vas communications:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170816045 ... s-levy.htm

No mention of providing source code, is there? Check your facts before ranting in future.

[chrisw]

Wasn't Rybka the reigning worldchampion when 'the problem started'?

And yes, it was harsh. That is why I called it 'overreacting'. But that is to be expected when you annoy your judges.

You mean the 'judges' who were found guilty of violating their own Ethics Rules and thus violating Vas's rights? Those judges?

[hgm]

No mention of providing source code, is there? Check your facts before ranting in future.

None of us can know what David asked Vas. But that is not really relevant. Relevant is that I would have asked for source code.

Of course I understand you and your pall want to pick a fight and raise hell. But there is no fight here. I told what I would have done if I had been running ICGA. If you don't like that, all you can do is thank heaven on your bare knees that I was not.

[towforce]

It is just stupid to investigate a program through decompilation.

Around eight years ago, I had to reverse-compile a program, and I was able to see clearly what it was doing. I used JustDecompile (link). I haven't used it recently, but at the time I was impressed with the quality of the source code it produced from a compiled program.

I'm not saying that reverse-compiling is always this good.

Anyway, it's been a few years since I read the ICGA report, but doesn't it directly compare assembly language rather than a reverse compilation?

btw, whether or not Vas was directly asked for the source code, one would expect the reaction of an innocent man to be, "Look - here's the source code".

Sometimes, it's not a single piece of evidence that's compelling, but the amount of "good" evidence.

[chrisw]

No mention of providing source code, is there? Check your facts before ranting in future.

None of us can know what David asked Vas. But that is not really relevant. Relevant is that I would have asked for source code.

We know what Levy asked Vas because we have the email traffic. No mention of source code.

You asserted Vas refused to provide source code. To assert that YOU need to show evidence of the request.
We have the evidence that there was NO such request made and therefore your assertion is without foundation and untrue.

Of course I understand you and your pall want to pick a fight and raise hell.

This thread appears to be started by one Madelaine Birchfield. I have no idea who she is and no connection.
You have made some untruthful statements. I corrected them. Correcting your untruthful assertions is neither picking a fight, not raising hell. Didn't you post recently about not allowing untruths to stand because misleading readers, as reason for your postings? I'm fairly sure it was you.

No idea who "my pall (sic)" is. Do you mean Flok? Or Madelaine?

But there is no fight here. I told what I would have done if I had been running ICGA. If you don't like that, all you can do is thank heaven on your bare knees that I was not.

Bizarre. There's no prior mention in this thread of your running ICGA nor speaking from an as if.

Let's get back to business shall we? Keep it to Computer Chess facts. At no time did the ICGA ask Vas for his source code. Therefore the accusation he is guilty of a breach of Rule 2 by refusing to supply source code (five or six years post event) in just not true. He wasn't asked.

[mar]

Around eight years ago, I had to reverse-compile a program, and I was able to see clearly what it was doing. I used JustDecompile
... snip ...

decompiling C# is absolutely trivial, you have all the symbols, everything. CIL is simple, stack-based. ILSpy (free) can do that easily
decompiling C or even C++ (basically any compiled language) is incredibly hard though, because we're talking higly optimized machine code without symbols

[towforce]

Around eight years ago, I had to reverse-compile a program, and I was able to see clearly what it was doing. I used JustDecompile
... snip ...

decompiling C# is absolutely trivial, you have all the symbols, everything. CIL is simple, stack-based. ILSpy (free) can do that easily
decompiling C or even C++ (basically any compiled language) is incredibly hard though, because we're talking higly optimized machine code without symbols

Point accepted.

Like I said, though, IIRC the report compared assembly language, not a decompilation.

[chrisw]

Reading and understanding the documents takes time: I have done it, but I'm not going to do it again. There seem to be links to the documents here.

Do yourself a favor, don't dive into that, stay healthy!

In short, Vas was convicted because he took too many ideas from Fruit.

What Madeleine is aiming at is the comparison between the sentiments of the 2005-2011 period and the sentiments of today regarding taking ideas (and how many) from other engines.

Even the 'took too many ideas' thing is problematical. Fruit author himself wrote that there were no original ideas in Fruit. For sure, all the 'ideas' identified by the panel authors in Rybka were known, used ideas around for a long time. It's not possible to identify the original origin (sorry!) of ideas that are in general use.
I think the people who think Rybka is derived from Fruit believe (feel) that Vas started with a copy of Fruit source and gradually modified it, including it's entire data structure (necessitating an entire rewrite, basically), until no Fruit remained.
The problem with that belief/feeling is that it is entirely unprovable. It's just a feeling/conviction, and you can't go around finding people guilty of things with severe consequences based on feelings.

[hgm]

We know what Levy asked Vas because we have the email traffic. No mention of source code.

Well, like I said, it is irrelevant. But you only know what you have, not what you miss. So just out of interest, can you show us a sworn affidavit by David Levy that these are the only e-mails he sent? It is not what I heard, btw.

Bizarre. There's no prior mention in this thread of your running ICGA nor speaking from an as if.

Well, so you get low marks for understanding reading... I would have though it would be obviously clear that I was speaking from that pespective in my very first posting in that thread. But if you didn't get it then, at least you know it now.