Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 16:03:37 09/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2000 at 16:50:16, Côme wrote: >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 Maybe it could have been (well for chess that is actualy nobody knows as good how full the chessworld is of lies so I keep it only to chess for the rest I am modest)if I did get the suport Instead to manny people working against me.
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.