Igca Rules are not coming from Mount Sinai

[fern]

If the Igca rules were to prevail in everything, scientific research would stop. Everything developed in every area comes from the use of previous materiel... To claim the obligation to reinvent the wheel each time, once and again, is preposterous.
Igca can establish the rules they wish for his competitions, but they have not moral or juridical weight, exception made of extreme cases of sheer copying.
To make of those rules kind of a divine decree is pedantic and sterile.
In fact, it is clear that it has been with all this supposed or real cloning, copying, codes stolen or lent, etc that the field has advanced at great steps these last three years after a lapse of comparative slowness and even stagnation.
Of course we have people that feel they have been hurt in his rights, and some times it has been so, but the progress is there to all to see.
Technological advance never has been a 100% clean affair regards
Fern

[hgm]

The ICGA rules are for the WCCC only. And they make perfect sense for sport events like that. That you suggest to be aplied to everything is the only thing prepostrous here.

It is prepostrous to wreck your body running 43 km if you can go that distance by car in 1/4 of the time. Yet we have marathons.

It is prepostrous that there are people that think the rules for participating in a marathon should be elevated to general trafic regulation, and that as a consequence all forms of transport other than walking should be forbidden. Or that everything that is allowed on the road should also be allowed to participate in the marathon...

[fern]

It seem like you did not understand my post, where precisely I qualified as preposterous the idea of transposing Igca rules to the rest of the world. Maybe there problems with the language here, but I read in your post a reproach on me as If i was asking that.

Fern

[hgm]

Well, you are the one that forwards the very idea that rules for a sports event could be applied to govern the world. That you eventually come to the conclusion that this is 'prepostrous', did not stop you from elaborating on it, like it ever was a serious proposition...

[bob]

If the Igca rules were to prevail in everything, scientific research would stop. Everything developed in every area comes from the use of previous materiel... To claim the obligation to reinvent the wheel each time, once and again, is preposterous.
Igca can establish the rules they wish for his competitions, but they have not moral or juridical weight, exception made of extreme cases of sheer copying.
To make of those rules kind of a divine decree is pedantic and sterile.
In fact, it is clear that it has been with all this supposed or real cloning, copying, codes stolen or lent, etc that the field has advanced at great steps these last three years after a lapse of comparative slowness and even stagnation.
Of course we have people that feel they have been hurt in his rights, and some times it has been so, but the progress is there to all to see.
Technological advance never has been a 100% clean affair regards
Fern

ICGA rules were never intended to apply EVERYWHERE. Just in ICGA events, which are organized by programmers, for programmers. Nothing more, nothing less...

[fern]

Did I?
That thing about rules?
Please quote...

Fedrn

[fern]

Exactly, and that is the reason of my post because in some stuff here it looks like is otherwise.

Fern

[bob]

Exactly, and that is the reason of my post because in some stuff here it looks like is otherwise.

Fern

I only see ICGA rules applied to computer chess tournaments such as the WCCC, or CCT, or ACCA events. Anyone is free to run a tournament any way they want. Participants are free to choose whether to play under tight constraints such as the ICGA rules, or under "anything goes" rules, or anywhere in between. Most "participants" are perfectly happy with the ICGA rules, however. Perhaps except for those that copy other programs...

[hgm]

In the PlayChess engine room you can play with 'anything goes' rules.

But of course that is not really what the people that are lamenting the fact that they cannot enter their own personal clone want: face 50 Houdinis. What they really want is rules were only their own clone would be allowed, and one other.

[geots]

If the Igca rules were to prevail in everything, scientific research would stop. Everything developed in every area comes from the use of previous materiel... To claim the obligation to reinvent the wheel each time, once and again, is preposterous.
Igca can establish the rules they wish for his competitions, but they have not moral or juridical weight, exception made of extreme cases of sheer copying.
To make of those rules kind of a divine decree is pedantic and sterile.
In fact, it is clear that it has been with all this supposed or real cloning, copying, codes stolen or lent, etc that the field has advanced at great steps these last three years after a lapse of comparative slowness and even stagnation.
Of course we have people that feel they have been hurt in his rights, and some times it has been so, but the progress is there to all to see.
Technological advance never has been a 100% clean affair regards
Fern

Fern, I do not think this is a coincidence that all the engines either criticized or criticized and also charges brought against- was done so by programmers who are not on the same level, for instance, as Vas. When I say not on the same level, hell- they are not on the same planet. What they were/are saying is "that you are not that much smarter than me, and you cannot basically make me look this inadequate. Therefore you have to be doing something illegal".

gts



PS: To possibly save time, before people deluge me with a barrage of silly denials, first remember I never read or respond.