Author: Mihaly Szalai
Date: 07:09:05 09/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2003 at 07:19:07, Mike Byrne wrote: >On September 10, 2003 at 02:54:47, Brian Kostick wrote: > >>On September 09, 2003 at 23:48:59, Mike Byrne wrote: >> >>>A simpleton with a strand of moral fiber can see the difference. Yes, perhaps >>>only one byte is changed - but the one byte changed in "theking" allows ANYONE, >>>including those that did not pay for CM9K to use the engine. Changing the book >>>one byte does not allow anyone to use the engine. >> >> >>By your way of explanation anyone, even those who did not pay for them, can use >>the Chessmaster books in a fashion other than their designed intent. Are you >>implying since open books are not executables they are free to hex edit, import >>into another GUI, or distribute? Do you think you have the right to do so >>because you paid for the product? What of a program that automates the hex >>editing of the Chessmaster books? >> >>Your other words of vulgar email and such just cloud the issue and are not part >>of fair discussion. Perhaps that was that you intent? Your name calling and >>moral fiber clause does not help me see the difference between haxoring the >>engine or the books. I think you are attempting to intimidate those who seek a >>legitimate answer about your involvement with cracking those opening books. I >>hope book authors will voice their opinion. BK > >I did not give the books the same status as the execuatble and it never occured >to me that people that did not have CM9K would want to use the Cm9K books - so >perhaps I erred in my thinking. I still believe there is a difference. My >involment in "cracking" the book was to try tthe suggestion somebody already >posted and say - yes it works. It was maybe 5 minutes. My post was more of >astoundment. My point in telling the vulgar email is not to cloud the issue - >but to show what strong , almost irrational emotions this topic generates in >some people on this issue. It clearly hits too close to home for some people. >Why of course is the interesting question. > >Best, > >Michael Every time you obtain the opk number from CM9000 you modify the software by replacing TheKing.exe with another executable. Do you have the right to do this? TheKing.exe is integral part of CM 9000. But probably a missing strand of moral fiber prevents me (poor simpleton)from understanding these things. Mihaly
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.