Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:35:18 04/30/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 1998 at 15:07:56, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >On April 29, 1998 at 05:47:52, Peter Herttrich wrote: > >>Hello and sorry for the hard subject. >> >>Here I repeat for the xth time my question: >> >>When do the the Chess-programmers discover the LAN-Cards? >> >>Every stupid shoot-em-up-game is able to use such >>ethernetcards. They are cheap (abt $20). >>Every OS has a IP-Stack, also Win3.11 (Trumpet-Shareware). >>The lan is very easy to monitor. With a tool like tcpdump >>you can monitor the whole traffic between the chessmachines. >>Then there is no possiblity to manipulate, because the >>traffic is tranparent. >>So the discussions abt the auto232 will have an end. >> >>And think abt the possibilities: Playing with any >>chessprogramm through the net, anyway, where there are. >>Any chessprogramm has a connection to the ICSs. >> > >>What did the community and chessprogrammers think >>about this? > >I think your argument is wrong. > >Not the way messages and moves are communicated are the problems >in auto232 play. > >The problem is: if there is a protocol, then you can cheat. >It's like playing against someone always repeating the same line, >you can prepare something against him. > >For example: suppose we use the genius trick (i'm not insulting >richard lang here, but i call this the genius trick because it >accidentely >happened when autoplaying diep at 2 hours 40 moves against genius, >and genius aborted a bad position because it got a fail low, and >searched >longer than the 40 minutes abort time): > >Suppose that your protocol like auto232 says: after x minutes we abort >a game. > >Now suppose your evaluation shows fail low, you give program more time >and more time and more time, then finally game gets aborted and a new >game started. Is this cheating? I think so. > >So as soon as you suspect that you're trapped after your book line is >over, >under some conditions you can easily abort. > >Second trick: assume you have played some thousands of games at home >with auto232. > >Now you have statistics about what lines your program scores well >against >certain other programs (opponent modelling). > >So now you only need to find out whether you are playing such an >opponent. >this can be done easily when you have your own driver (chessbase why >did you develop own driver and spend masses of time on this so money >on this when auto232 player is so easy to implement?). > >This greatly will improve scores against the programs: >Genius, Mcpro, Rebel, Hiarcs, Kallisto, Wchess. > >This because these programs have their own driver. > >I'm not sure whether you can detect easily >what program is at the noname-driver. > >Experts? > >>Cheerio >>Peter I don't think any of this is a problem. The proper way to do this is thru a "middleman" application that acts as a "server". Both programs connect to that referee program and send stuff to it. It then sends the stuff to the other program. That way programs don't talk to each other, they talk through a third party, and discovering your opponent's ID would be harder. And the referee could be modified to further disguise things if need-be... And there would be no way to "cheat" because here we would *not* have a time-out any longer... you lose if you don't move, because there would be *no* excuse for not moving... the auto232 is so fragile, the "timeout" feature was added. With TCP/IP, that would be totally obsolete... just like Crafty playing on chess.net... no "time-out" period at all...
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.