Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 14:14:27 01/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 09, 2002 at 23:46:57, pavel wrote: >On January 09, 2002 at 23:35:05, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On January 09, 2002 at 23:25:00, pavel wrote: >> >>>On January 09, 2002 at 20:00:19, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On January 09, 2002 at 18:10:33, Sally Weltrop wrote: >>>> >>>>>nothing agaist Ed but his site does NOT have secured transaction. kind of wierd >>>>>considering it's 2002 & the potential for abuse abounds out there >>>> >>>>Okay, after the xx times the issue has come up again, I will bite this time... >>>> >>>>There is no abuse and I will tell you why I will leave things as they are >>>>although I fear it will be not satisfying or convincing for all but let me start >>>>with 2 firm statements: >>>> >>>>1) These so-called "secured transactions" are a farce. >>>> >>>>2) Believe it or not, my way of accepting orders is much safer than the >>>>so-called "secured transactions". >>>> >>>>Why? >>>> >>>>First of all you need to understand how an order on the Rebel page works, that >>>>is, you type the required info and then submit. From the information an email is >>>>created and directly send to my server all in a split of a second. My provider >>>>daily handles over 2 million emails. >>>> >>>>Now a hacker NEVER is going to search in million of emails, that is insane and >>>>total non productive. The volume of emails is a guarantee for that. >>>> >>>>No, hackers focus on those sites (protocols) where the REAL money is, the SAME >>>>companies who have introduced the "secured transactions". Millions of people >>>>daily order on-line via those companies, a real goldmine if the hacker is able >>>>to hack the protocol, tens of thousands of CC numbers are on the street. >>>> >>>>And how many times have you read such stories in the news? >>>> >>>>Too much I would say. >>>> >>>>Now since 1995 I am accepting on-line orders, no single case of fraud or hacking >>>>has taken place. All of this (as described above) has made me decide to stick to >>>>my way, because it is better. >>>> >>>>Futhermore my order page offers you (in case you still have doubts) to order by >>>>fax, I also provide a link to other companies who do support "secured >>>>transactions". >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>> >>> >>>I agree that those so-called secured trasaction are not that secured and are >>>more prone to hacks. But your way is nothing better either. But considering the >>>alternative, I would stick to your way of trading, because it's less >>>conventioanl. >>> >>>by the way, good luck on rebel century. >>>You just gave me a reason to buy rebel century and rebel tiger (too). >>>Pls, just dont port it under chessbase interface. ;) >>> >>>pavs >> >>On the contrary, I suggest the ACCP (Averno's Chess Communication Protocol) >>recently described in the winboard forum by Jose Carlos (author of Averno) >>to link a winboard engine to the Chessbase GUI. It work flawlessly like >>a charm. It does what it is supposed to do and you will never have a complain >>that Rebel is working with decreased strength. That's guaranteed. >> >>Rebel will be WB protocol II? >> >>Miguel >>ACCP fan, I think that one day I will implement it in Gaviota, my poor engine. >>PS: If rebel is going to be a WB engine, it will probably be the first >>engine I will buy. > > >Is it like a adapter you use seperately from the engine, or you have to port it >on your engine? Sounds good. > >Does that mean I can finally test Yace against Fritz 7 under fritz interface? Sorry pavel, that would not be possible with ACCP. :-) The basic idea of ACCP is this: When it sees the command "Fritz" (sent by the ChessBase GUI) Averno immediately shows a message explaining why an engine will play with reduce strength under CB and exits thereafter. Therefore, nobody will complain about reduced strength, weird problems etc. So, Averno does not want to support a protocol that is crippled. It is possibly the way to go. My message was a joke, partially. I truly believe that such a fine program as Rebel should not be allowed to be used handicapped. Maybe it can allowed to be used as an analysis engine but not in engine-engine matches. Regards, Miguel > >yey! > >pavs.;)
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.