Author: Harry Field
Date: 03:40:56 12/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 07, 2000 at 03:08:33, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 06, 2000 at 13:30:05, Harry Field wrote: > >>On December 06, 2000 at 10:52:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 06, 2000 at 01:20:08, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On December 06, 2000 at 00:50:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>Isn't this the latest fad? Can you say "deep junior", "deep fritz"? Care >>>>>to guess where "deep" was first used? :) Ie what could be more confusing >>>>>than "deep junior" after there is already a very famous program that went >>>>>by "deep blue junior"??? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I wouldn't have dared to say it myself. I happen to be in perfect agreement with >>>>you on this topic. >>>> >>>> >>> >>>I'm a big boy. I don't mind stating the obvious. >> >>Except you happen to be wrong. Big boy. >> >> >>> >>>:) >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Seems to me that borrowing from a "famous name" is quite acceptable, >>>>>wouldn't you think? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I did not say it is not acceptable or illegal. >>>> >>>>It's just a low commercial practice. And generally used by followers, that's why >>>>I have been disappointed to see Stefan doing it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Christophe >>> >>> >>>I wouldn't begin to claim to know the motivation behind any of the look-alike >>>names. I simply don't like the idea much. IE "crafty" is "crafty" whether it >>>is a parallel searcher or a serial searcher. I don't like any of the following, >>>personally: >>> >>>1. the name is a proper subset of the name of another program. IE there is >>>already a program named x y z, and the new name is either x y, x z or y z. >>> >>>2. the name is an improper subset of the name of another program. ie there >>>is a program named x y, and the new program is named x z or y z. >>> >>>1 certainly leads to mass confusion. 2 leads to some confusion. Both seem to >>>be 'strange'... >>> >>>IE on ICC we have had a "deepblue", a "deeperblue". A "diepblue". Etc. >>>I don't like any of them. Since none have Hsu/Campbell/Hoane/etc behind them. >> >>Hsu/Cambell ripped the name "Deep Thought" off from the Douglas Adams book >>"Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". Deep Thought was a computer which was >>supposed to be able to answer the question of life, the universe and everything, >>taking seven million years and producing the answer "42". >> >>Also around at that time, as "big boys" will remember, was the Linda Lovelace >>porn movie "Deep Throat", featuring a prolonged act of oral sex for the "first" >>time on mass release in video porn stores. The name "Deep Throat" was then used >>for the mole in the Nixon administration which was feeding inside informations >>to Woodward/Berstein team reference the Watergate scandal. Whether Deep Thought >>or Deep Throat came first (sic), I don't know. Both came before Hsu and co. >> >>Deep Thought was then renamed Deep Blue for IBM purposes. How your theory that a >>ripped off name could then be 'owned' and further users of it castigated is >>beyond me. Have you an agenda or case to prove? >> >> >>"Gambit" is a well known chess term and is and has been used left right and >>centre for quite a while. You can purchase chess programs at "Gambitsoft", you >>can purchase "Kasparov's Gambit", there is a "Gambit Tiger", programs now are >>released with "versions" containing Gambit in the name. We know some of you like >>to own everything, but facts right before foot goes in mouth in future, please. >>You are not original. > > > >I don't understand why you are attacking Bob in such a gross way. I even wonder >if you have understood a word of what he was saying. > > >Further, a few weeks after "Gambit Tiger" has been released, and welcomed by the >community, somebody produces a "Gambit" program. > >It does not sound obvious to you that this is only for commercial reasons? >Juming on the bandwagon without paying the fare? > >What is the last time before "Gambit Tiger" that a program has used the word >"Gambit"? > >Answer: 1993. It was "Kasparov Gambit". > > >That was my only point. What? That Kasparov's Gambit was published in 1993? A pointless point, no? Anyway Stefan can use the word "Gambit", it's not >illegal. > Quite so. Anyone, including you, can use Gambit, Deep, Blitz for any chess program. There is no bandwagon to jump onto; you don't own the bandwagon; there is no fare to pay; MK has made no fanfare over the name, it is not advertised; the only fanfare is yours, making a deal out of nothing. It is Christmas, commercial noise. > > > Christophe
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.