Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The privilege of becoming a beta-tester

Author: Côme

Date: 13:50:16 09/05/00

Go up one level in this thread


On September 05, 2000 at 16:08:18, Marc van Hal wrote:

>On September 05, 2000 at 13:48:39, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 05, 2000 at 13:12:36, pavel wrote:
>>
>>>On September 05, 2000 at 12:30:51, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 05, 2000 at 12:04:50, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>One day someone may write a book about the sociology of computer chess. Well,
>>>>>maybe the topic is not interesting enough for a book, but at least an article
>>>>>could be fascinating. A few paragraphs should relate to beta-testing and the
>>>>>relationship between CC freaks and programmers. Fernando: are you interested?
>>>>>
>>>>>Months ago, Uri posted that he expected to be paid for his collaboration with
>>>>>the development of chess programs. It made me smile, because beta-testing is
>>>>>supposed to be a privilege for the tester, although I never quite understood why
>>>>>it works this way. But it does. From one day to the next, a freak may be
>>>>>promoted to the "in" circle, improve his status to the imaginary rank of expert
>>>>>and get the ensuing ego-booster, but he has to pay a price. I have seen private
>>>>>emails from beta-testers published without permission when it was commercially
>>>>>convenient; beta-testers demoted as no-team members; beta-testers forced to
>>>>>write commercially useful stuff for the honor of spending X (when X tends to
>>>>>very many) hours hunting for bugs and checking the engine. Etc. It would seem a
>>>>>matter of common sense to assume, as Uri did, that collaborating in the
>>>>>improvement of a commercial product is a paid job, but in computer chess it is
>>>>>the other way round, even if the tester doesn't pay with money but in species.
>>>>
>>>>I want to say that I know that programmers do not earn much from their program
>>>>so I do not think that beta testers should earn a lot of money from their job
>>>>but I think that it is fair to get something from it(even if it is only 0.1$ per
>>>>hour of testing).
>>>>
>>>>A programmer can decide to give all  the beta testers together 20% of the money
>>>>that the programmer earns from his(her) program in the next year
>>>>(the programmer can decide to give part of them more money if they are more
>>>>important and give more productive information).
>>>>
>>>>It may be a good deal for the programmer because the programmer can get better
>>>>beta testers or even the same beta testers who work only for his(her) program
>>>>and not for other programs and if these better beta testers are the difference
>>>>between being number 1 in the ssdf and being number 2 both sides can earn money
>>>>from this deal.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>and how would you know how much hours the beta tester is actually spending on
>>>the testing? how would you calculate it with minimum wage?
>>
>>I think that the question is not the number of hours but the question how much
>>they help to the programmer.
>>
>>Suppose the programmer has 20 beta testers.
>>
>>The programmer can decide to give everyone of them at least 1/2% and the
>>decision if to give part of them more money will be decided later based on the
>>information that they give.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I personally believe it is a previlege for the beta tester, just like enrique
>>>said.
>>
>>1)Part of the beta testers do not think like you and more beta testers can give
>>more information(I can test the commercial or the freeware programs and do not
>>need to be a beta tester in order to test programs).
>>
>>I was  a beta tester of Junior in the past because Junior is from Isarel and I
>>wanted to support it but I decided to stop doing it.
>>
>>2)If the beta tester know that (s)he earn part of the money (s)he will be more
>>motivated to give ideas in order to help the program.
>>
>>I did not tell many of my ideas and I think that part of them can be productive
>>for chess programs.
>>
>>Here is one simple example that I posted here about time allocation:
>>
>>Programs usually not follow the rule use more time when the time control is
>>slower and are going to use more time when the time control is 2 hours/game and
>>less time when the time control is 2 hours/120 moves.
>>
>>3)The beta tester is going to avoid testing other programs(there are beta
>>testers who test more than one program) and will have more time to test one
>>program.
>
>>
>>Uri
>After I saw yestereday that I did get no response from Schroder BV I was realy
>disapointed
>And wrote him about the fact that I was suprised he simply neglacted my
>qualeties
>And just called some points to remind me on my work
>A lately many games a)Kasparov versus (started with world)
>                    b)Kramnik versus
>                    c)Smyslov Rebel Century (could have been where I pointed out
>the 1-0 and 0-1 in that game
>Winning computer personeletys
>But most of all finding the weak and strong points of a program
>I am sure that most programs would not be as good without me today.
>
>Where I did not even mention that EOC and anti GM started with ideas from me
>And that games from me where used to improve the rebel openingsbook
>so is Junior6's openings book improved by anelyzes from me
>I you want to neglact this all there is no use for stronger programs
>and you also can put Kasparov in a god for seaken corner.
>The new title on the New in Chess page is the biggest lie of all
>(The complete treuth of openings)'( Franz Morsh told them that that game was
>long theory but they didn't want to put my name on that game)
>Also some people from Chessbase tried to refute my lines but they did it in such
>away it was unclear for a program but still verry clear to me that my lines
>where corect and their refutations where wrong (wich they new if they had looked
>closely to my omplete anelyzes)
>Then as last to mention that I started my work to speed up chess theory to pass
>at least 2 centurys,but later on only was being hold by showing that it indeed
>was all my work and keep pointing at it
>But you have forgotten that I easely can show that that it is my work this site
>is the prove.
>All the games later on played by GM's are posted here long before they where
>played.(only with much more anelyzes from that game)
>then I started to point that I realy found it a joke that many programmers
>neglacted my work and later on get punished for this against GMs
>
>To my opinion to get a beta tester like me is a privilege for the programmer
>and not for the beta tester.
>
>Marc van Hal

Ha ha !!
It's too much !
The day when you was born is probably the greatest day for humanity !
Ha ha !!
Best Regards
Alexandre Côme



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.