Author: margolies,marc
Date: 22:59:29 06/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
I cannot agree that testing for chess engine activity on your PC during an on-line game is an invasion of privacy in any sense. First what is private about playing chess in a public room on the internet? And are you not aware that when you play chess on the internet that you are being observed by others? In america, where I live privacy is a constitutionally protected right. But it does not extend to the public roads and thorough fares. As an example, policemen in the USA are allowed to attach a radio tracking device to any car that they wish to follow without obtaining a court warrant-- so long as they do not unlawfully enter the car to attach it. Our laws understand that if an action is on a public street and can be observed from a public street, the technological issue is merely how we ascertain something and not whether we have the right to do it with our eyes. We have a choice of using chess servers or not. The server is someone else's property and their rules of use apply. On June 20, 2003 at 08:59:57, Marc van Hal wrote: >On June 20, 2003 at 01:16:11, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On June 19, 2003 at 19:39:22, Pierre Chevalier wrote: >> >>>Many chess playing sites have ways to detect whether a player is >>>also running chess software on his computer. Are there any >>>products available to mask the software? Could such a masking >>>program be detected itself? >>>This is similar to olympic drug testing. Certain masking agents >>>are illegal themselves even if they do not enhance performance >>>because they could conceal drugs that do enhance perfromance. >> >>In the area of online 3D games they have similar problems. People hack the >>opengl drivers and make aimbots (you have perfect aim), wallhacks (you can see >>through walls), etc. There is software to detect them, but as soon as that >>software is released to the public, the hackers work on bypassing it. Then the >>software developers patch their program so it will work again, and the hackers >>hack it again, and round and round we go. It's been going on for many years, and >>it doesn't look like it's going to get better. >> >>ICC could implement code in Blitzin to detect all public chess engines, but then >>someone could hack that, and then ICC would fix it, and someone would hack it >>again, and on and on. What makes it even harder is that a person might not be >>running the chess program on the same computer, so you have to rely on style of >>play, which can work in some cases, but it can still be complicated and error >>prone. > >Well infact this detecting software. >Is in a deeper sence a form of invadeing privacy. >And indeed doesn't work for people who use two computers. > >It most of the time are these unrealistic tac tics in blitz games which realy >show your oponent does use a chess program. >But in other postions compare data is prety safe. >Aslong as the postion is complicated enough. >But you also can detect chessprograms by their mistakes. >And less postional or strategical play. > >Personaly I many times even can tell which program and even which personalety is >being used. >Because I used many programs and personaletys to check my analyzes . >Though some personaletys act the same as an other program. > >Marc
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.