Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:44:34 08/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 2001 at 17:44:10, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >Hi there, > >WB AnMon 5.14 is available for download on my webpage. >AnMon is my favorite program and I have a lot of fun with the program from >Christian Barreteau, France. It is important that user make a big test for the >next WinBoard / UCI Edition III. > >Please see the message in my News Ticker. >Maybe this is the biggest beta test which the Chess World saw :-)) > >Thanks for "YOUR" work and thanks to Christian Barreteau for his fantastic chess >engine. > >Have fun and have a nice olympiad ... :-)) > >Frank`s Chess Page (with a new URL) >http://www.amateurschach.de > >The UCI Edition is not free for download. >I try that all WB versions are free, but not the UCI versions. > >This is maybe one way that amateur programmers get a little bit money for his >work. I thought that the definition of amatuer programmers is programmers who do not get money for their work. If they get money from their work even if they do not live from it they are not amatuer programmers(for example Amir Ban is not an amatuer inspite of the fact that he earns most of his money not from Junior) Every programmer who gets money from his program even if it is only 1$ is not an amatuer by my definition. I was told in the past that Amir ban is considered as professional when programmers of the young talents are not considered as professionals. I see no reason for it and I think that we need a clear definition for amatuers. My definition is simple and clear. The definition of other people is not clear and it is not clear what is the minimal money that programmers should earn in order to be called professional. OK, Christian Barreteau wrote me that AnMon is only a little hobby and for >sure ... Chrsitian can also give his engine for free but "I" have no interest >that UCI Amateur engines are for free available. I hope that chess computer >people can understand my reasons. I think the programmers can decide for themselves. I see no reason for you to tell them what to do. If they want to lose money by giving their program for free it is their decision. > >UCI is for me a chance for Amateur programmers because I have the opinion that >not all must be for free available. I have the opinion that I have no right to tell programmers what to do and I have no right to tell them what they should give for free and what they should not give for free. They have the right to give UCI for free and they have the right to give nothing for free. Uri
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.