Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 10:32:48 01/27/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2004 at 11:59:46, Thomas Mayer wrote: >Hi Mogens, Hey Thomas, >well, for a programmer the showed stuff here in this forum somewhere should be >already enoug to get very suspicious... of course similar strings, filenames >etc. do not give enough evidence to call something a clone or crafty-related or >whatever - but it makes one suspicious... Suspicious enough to ask the author >for some prove. He refused. According to the rule he must be disqualified then >because he does not follow the rules... > >Anyway, I heard that someone has even debugged List (I have no idea which >version) and in the evaluation nearly everything was crafty-like. I have not >done this myself, so I can not say to much about this - but this makes one even >more suspicious... Since it's a Crafty clone, it would be easy to check a number of positions for similarity in evaluation. That has to be the most minimal of requirements for raising suspicion. >My opinion is, that List might (!) have started with great parts of Crafty, >using it's environment - and later he has changed very much, especially in the >search. If this is true (I don't know) this would be okay anyway, if he would >remark that and give some thanks to Bob. A general search among amateur engines would IMO reveal numerous similarities without conctituting anything resembling a clone. >If this is NOT true, I wonder why he had so many problems a) to show the Jury >some evidence that it is original b) to give afterwards some statements. Well, maybe he got pissed or lack of time. It really doesn't matter. The value of the accusation determines either way. Regards, Mogens
This page took 0.03 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.