Author: Mridul Muralidharan
Date: 13:18:48 05/31/05
Go up one level in this thread
Now thta is really strange that you mentioned that movie - it jus played here last week on tv ! :) Mridul On May 30, 2005 at 15:45:05, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On May 30, 2005 at 11:57:01, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: > >>On May 30, 2005 at 05:11:50, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >> >>>On May 30, 2005 at 04:00:22, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >>> >>>>On May 29, 2005 at 19:09:14, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 29, 2005 at 15:08:17, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 29, 2005 at 11:35:42, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 29, 2005 at 08:25:02, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 28, 2005 at 12:29:33, Günther Simon wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On May 28, 2005 at 12:20:00, Vladimir Elin wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Hi Alex, >>>>>>>>>>I think that reason for you to use only engines with open sources and delete >>>>>>>>>>all engines were you can see words : alpha, beta, prunning and many many etc. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Vladimir that is really a dumb post after all... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Guenther >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>You idea that Patriot 2.0 is clone - full absurd. >>>>>>>>>>Best. >>>>>>>>>>Vladimir. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Is it really such a dumb post ? I am not sure - whenever someone mentions >>>>>>>>"clone" , I am skeptical - inspite of the number of clones that are discovered. >>>>>>>>I prefer to give the author the benifit of doubt - a genourously large benifit >>>>>>>>at that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Nothing is opensource programs is a "secret" , I mean - even if they were not >>>>>>>>opensource , the amateur (and definitely professional) authors will have arrived >>>>>>>>(or already have) at them independently : by expiriments or through available >>>>>>>>docs. I dont really see any ground breaking code or idea in any of the >>>>>>>>opensource engines today - all are straight forward implementations of the >>>>>>>>standard theory. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Most , if not all , clone accusations show as "proof" something really dumb - >>>>>>>>like string search , result in a single position , behaviour of a parser (which >>>>>>>>is _not_ part of the engine as such people !) , etc - maybe these are the only >>>>>>>>possible ways to identify clones (I am not sure - and as I have posted before , >>>>>>>>I dont really care much) , but based on such flimsy grounds people should not >>>>>>>>accuse others. >>>>>>>>When you accuse a program as a clone - you are also maligning the reputation of >>>>>>>>the author : which is the more serious thing IMHO. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What Vladimir Elin is hinting at is that (I think) , people (usually non-chess >>>>>>>>engine programmers who know quiet little about the programming aspects) see >>>>>>>>something/anything strange (in their eyes) and cry wolf. >>>>>>>>Like a string search which returns strings - which might be what is defined in >>>>>>>>the pgn spec , or a binary search which returns data match (whcih might be de to >>>>>>>>a generated parser for pgn handling for book) , etc ! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Ofcourse wachful people are always needs to see the hints which will lead to the >>>>>>>>identification of many clones , but IMO we need a better way to decide how to >>>>>>>>identify clones. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The current process seems to be : 1) Accuse 2) Flame 3) Author defends 4) >>>>>>>>mudslinging 5) Nasty posts - brining the author's whole family history to the >>>>>>>>ground 6) Challenge (to show source) 7) If 6 accepted , cleared , else branded >>>>>>>>as clone. >>>>>>>> I dont know about others, but no I am never going to send my source code to >>>>>>>>someone I dont personally trust - even if the rest of the computer chess >>>>>>>>community might seem to. >>>>>>>>Not everyone knows what the non-opensource guys are doing in their code : and >>>>>>>>personally I do many a stupid things , but I might have something interesting >>>>>>>>too :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>So why have opensource engines ? - different question anyway , we wont discuss >>>>>>>>that since it is largely an authors decision. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>We should try to promote the number of amateur engines so that as many people as >>>>>>>>possible should enter this field - not discourage people. (both within >>>>>>>>reasonable limits ofcourse) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Mridul >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Mridul -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>>First of all, your post makes me wonder if you are familiar with the Patriot 2.0 >>>>>>>situation, but anyway those things are boring for me so let's talk philosophy >>>>>>>for a second :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I've had the good or maybe bad luck to spend at least 3 years living in five >>>>>>>different countries, and I can make a certain observation. In two of these >>>>>>>countries - USA and Germany - society essentially works. Wages are decent, crime >>>>>>>is kept down, things just work. In three of these countries - Hungary, Czech >>>>>>>Republic and Poland - no offense intended to anyone, but they just don't work as >>>>>>>well. People steal from the government without getting punished, people cheat on >>>>>>>their jobs, nobody is willing to deal with various problems, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>What's the difference? A huge difference is that in Germany and USA, people >>>>>>>essentially care. If they see something wrong, they report it and attempt to >>>>>>>rectify it. This goes from cleaning up a small mess on the road, to calling the >>>>>>>police if the neighbor is beating his family, etc. Throughout Eastern Europe, >>>>>>>people are apathetic - and everybody suffers as a result. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Sometimes, it can seem a bit too much. I remember I had this impression when I >>>>>>>first came to the US - why is everybody so concerned with things that aren't >>>>>>>their business. In the overall picture, though, society is better for it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>So I certainly appreciate that there are people who are going to look into these >>>>>>>things and do something about it, rather than just endlessly holding their >>>>>>>tongue for fear of being out of line. Without it, computer chess will just be a >>>>>>>mess. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Vas >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi Vas, >>>>>> >>>>>> Like I mentioned myself , we need people who will point out the >>>>>>errors/suspicions. >>>>>>But these are just that suspicions - a 35% binary match of the executables (egtb >>>>>>will account for that ;-) ) , a small set of common strings , a bug in the fen >>>>>>parser (I have seen multiple people misread/misinterpret the same spec - there >>>>>>will be grey areas even in the most well written specs) , etc are not enough by >>>>>>a long shot to accuse something as a clone - they can be indicators of a >>>>>>potential clone at best. >>>>>> >>>>>>I visit CCC less and less nowadays - and each time I do so , a new program seems >>>>>>to be accused of being a clone : personally I dont care , it is a hobby for me , >>>>>>something I use to fill my remaining freetime with when I am not busy with other >>>>>>opensource projects I am involved with - but true , there are people who take it >>>>>>seriously and for them and for the future (if not for other reasons) we should >>>>>>try to keep this field as clean as possible. >>>>>> >>>>>>But that should not be at the expense of any tom dick and harry coming out and >>>>>>accusing programs of being a clone. >>>>>>That is why I said - we should have a better process for clone issue : how clone >>>>>>suspicions are raised , how they are probed into , how they are proved/disproved >>>>>>, etc : a bunch of amateurish tests should not be the basis of flame wars here. >>>>>>Makes the whole forum (and field for that matter) more and more unreadable and >>>>>>uninteresting. >>>>>> >>>>>> The analogy you raised is not really valid in this context (IMHO :) ). >>>>>>I wrote a long response in this space on that - and then removed it. >>>>>>That is not the matter we are discussing here :) - it will most probably only >>>>>>expose my ignorance of the issues concerned since I have never physically been >>>>>>to the places mentioned like you though I am made aware of the ground realities >>>>>>through my friends. >>>>>> >>>>>>Anyway , you are correct about the first point - my understanding (from what >>>>>>little I read among the accusations and counteraccusations that kept flying >>>>>>around) was that Patriot 2 was accused of being a clone , author did not expose >>>>>>the source code , branded as a clone by the community here based on the >>>>>>circumstantial evidence found (I read a few - maybe I missed a lot more) and the >>>>>>ones I read looked not very solid to me (I have not done any research on Patriot >>>>>>and never used it for that matter , so likely that I am missing the finer points >>>>>>of the Patriot2 clone issue). >>>>>> >>>>>>My main problem with these accusations is that : >>>>>> >>>>>>1) People here follow the maxim guilty until proven innocent. >>>>>> >>>>>>2) Sensationalism in the accusations - I see more and more of this in the media >>>>>>where it is better to say something bad to get the max amount of publicity and >>>>>>attention : same thing is being "imported" into CCC. >>>>>> >>>>>>3) In general , it is the author's reputation which is more at stake than the >>>>>>program as such , and mudslinging is affecting the author's reputation (the >>>>>>accusations might or mightnot be correct). >>>>>>Hence , even if something is disproved - the result is not going to remove the >>>>>>damage already done to it ! >>>>>> >>>>>>"An arrow which leaves the bow and a word which leaves the mouth cannot be taken >>>>>>back" - an old saying here :) >>>>>> >>>>>>I believe in "Innocent until proven guilty" too much (it might be a >>>>>>cultural/upbringing thing, not sure) , which is why these discussions disturb me >>>>>>more. >>>>>>Very few people seem to stick up for the author in general - like Peter Skinner >>>>>>seems to be doing right now (just skimmed through the posts now) , the more >>>>>>vocal group are the ones who are accusing. The others seem to be maintaining a >>>>>>studied silence - true , you should try not to react until you get all the facts >>>>>>- mark of a wise man , but sometimes it galls me when the more vocal group makes >>>>>>the community believe in an issue just because they keep repeating it and the >>>>>>others dont challenge or respond until everyone believes it ! >>>>>>I have seen way too many "discussions" of this nature in other forums online and >>>>>>now recently in CCC also. >>>>>>Justice happens when both sides are looked at impartially : assuming people are >>>>>>really interested in getting to the roots of the problem. (which most of us in >>>>>>CCC here are I assume). >>>>>> >>>>>>Note : even now I am not really saying whether the programs are clones or not , >>>>>>I dont have the data , unfortunately neither the time to investigate , or the >>>>>>patience for it right now and really appreciate the work people are puttig in >>>>>>this work. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>Mridul >>>>> >>>>>Hi Mridul -- >>>>> >>>>>Ok there is no way I can write something intelligent at this hour :) >>>>> >>>>>There is a balance of course between persecuting too many innocents, and >>>>>defending too many who are guilty. >>>>> >>>>>I guess I don't see this particular cause as very attractive. >>>>> >>>>>Here is some more stuff about it: >>>>> >>>>>http://www.uciengines.de/UCI-Engines/Patriot/Patriot2/hauptteil_patriot2.html >>>>> >>>>>But frankly - I don't really care. :) >>>>> >>>>>Vas >>>> >>>>Hi Vas, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the link - will look into it later today. >>>>My understanding of the legal system (atleast over here) is that even if a >>>>thousand guilty escape , one innocent should not be punished. >>>> >>>>But you are correct - even I dont really care about clone issue (you publish the >>>>source , you expect others to use it - else dont publish it !) , and as I said >>>>before , if I ever do opensource any of my programs , I still wont care if >>>>someone clones them :) >>>>All this discussions is just to support the rest who do and the lend moral >>>>support to the programmers in general :-D >>>>In most of clone "discussions" here (I might have missed some) , I always >>>>support the programmer even when the evidence seems a bit too overwhelming and >>>>back off only when it becomes a certainity ... maybe it is just the romantic in >>>>me :) >>>>Even if initially through a clone , I would prefer more people getting into a >>>>field - later on they might start off on their own and create something really >>>>interesting (ideas I mean - I dont care much about implementation details) , >>>>etc. >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>>Mridul >>> >>>I tend to think like this myself but over time I've come to realize that if >>>everybody was like this, there would be a lot of robbers and thieves floating >>>around. >> >> >>Well , not everyone thinks that way (unlike you and me :) ) - general people >>usually are the first to brand someone as a criminal on the basis of flimsy >>evidence : usually what gets fed to them through the media and based on >>sensational/gruesome facts. >>As an individual , everyone is free to form their own opinions (and he does not >>need to justify/defend it to anyone). >>But before we (as a community) declare that something is a clone , get it >>removed from tourny's , brand the author as a clone-creater , etc (which could >>be considered parallel to dishing out a verdict in court ?) we should try to be >>more rigourous. >>For me personally it is not important whether program X (whether written by me >>or not) is branded as a clone : since I do think for kicks during free time , >>but not everyone will take this attitude : and I want to give those people >>support who might not be very vocal or have a large support group - until >>atleast it is conclusively proved. >> >> >>> >>>A lot of wrongdoing depends on the uncertainty of the audience - people may >>>pretty much understand what is happening, but they can't "prove" it, while >>>others are talking about "innocent until proven guilty" and in other ways >>>rewarding doing nothing. In the meantime, the robbers are laughing all the way >>>to the bank. >> >> >>Very true - we have way too many incidents in nearly all countries about people >>who have scammed , conned , robbed (some going into billions of dollars) and >>still walk around free. >>I heard that a murderer in highly publicized case in US also escaped this way >>(vaguely remember hearing something like this). >> >>But that does not remove the fundamental tennent of the justice system , which >>is justice and the accused is held innocent until proven guilty. >>In some case , this gets modified as proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt - >>which is when a really unlucky innocent guy gets the sentence based on >>circumstantial evidence. (I dont know how many actual cases have gone through >>like this , but there are way too many movies here which highlight these >>loopholes here :) ) >> >>Innocent until proven guilty does not mean that the robbers get to roam around >>free. >>It means that the system will not brand someone as a criminal until the >>investigation is over and all sides of the case/arguments are looked into - the >>case is still in active scrutiny and until it is cleared , it will be ... >>There just wont be a bias against the accused. (Example : society looking at a >>chain killer with very hostile viewpoint , if public decide his case, he will >>get lynched - but if justice is to be served , the court will hear his side , >>give him oppurtunatet to defend (most important !) and then decide impartially >>on the basis of the facts presented - not on passion). >> >> > >The cases where this really becomes a tricky area is when it's pretty obvious to >anybody with some common sense what has happened, but there is still the >question of going through the correct process. > >For example - imagine that you are a cop trying to put Al Capone in jail. >Everybody knows he should be there, but you haven't been able to formally >collect the evidence. Now, you have a chance to illegally sieze the key >evidence, in such a way that you'll still get it admitted. Do you do it? > >Actually, there was a really cool (and really old) movie about this sort of >thing. The name was something like "The Star Chamber" or maybe "Red Star >Chamber". A bunch of cops got sick of criminals wiggling out by legal loopholes >and technicalities, so they made a secret group. They would meet, review a case, >and if they voted unanimously that the guy was guilty, one of them would get the >task to kill him. I think you can probably guess how the plot developed :) > >Vas > >>> >>>That's what happens when things start to fall apart. >>> >>>Of course this is all maybe a bit too dramatic for copying some computer chess >>>code. BTW - do check out that link - it's pretty funny IMHO ... >> >> >>Very true :) >>I did look at the website and had a real good laugh :) >>One important question I had though was - I would be scandalised with the nodes >>to depth and branching factor :-) >> >>Thanks, >>Mridul >> >>PS : Feeling damn sleepy , so maybe the post is semi to full rambling and >>totally incoherent - will rephrase/repost if that is the case tommorrow morning >>:) >>Personally I get disturbed when I see accusations like this - I like to keep the >>field clean if possible with as much cooperation between contributors : ah well >>, I like to live in utopia :-D >> >>> >>>Vas
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.