bob wrote:
Have you read the ICGA report CAREFULLY? Have you read Zach's evidence CAREFULLY? Have you read Mark's evidence CAREFULLY? Have you looked at the Rybka 1.6.1 / Crafty 19.x evidence CAREFULLY?
If you answer YES to all of those, and are not convinced, then it is unlikely that you would be convinced even should Vas confess..
Frankly, I don't understand any of it. Maybe I am too stupid. I don't understand Ed's side either. There is so much material on both sides- some say you can get this or that from RE- some say you can't. Some say the PST values are the same, some say the coefficients are different, making the whole table different. Some say PSTs don't constitute code. I'm not a programmer- how can I know? All I know is that some experts agree with your side, some don't. I have no clue!
As for the human side, the whole thing did not feel professional from the start. The findings of the panel may be correct- I don't know. The panel does not seem to be unbiased to me, whatever is said. My guess is that Vas WAS guilty of at least breaking the rules, at least in the way I would interpret them. Watching interviews with him, he seems a little liberal with his interpretation of what's "public domain".
As to Ed, he comes across as someone who is passionate and is standing up for what he believes in. Of course that's my POV- you can call him a kid a kid destroying his toys so no-one can have them. I think that's bogus.
