Author: José Carlos
Date: 12:09:05 11/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2003 at 14:47:21, Bob Durrett wrote: > >After all, who is to offer PROOF that it isn't so? For the Junior, Fritz, >Shredder, HIARCS & Tiger programmers to offer proof, they would have to reveal >their source code, which they surely will not do. > >Hyatt has often said that his code is not optimized. Maybe the front-runner >commercial programs are just improved versions of Crafty! If Crafty can be made >100 points better by an attorney, what could talented chess programmers >accomplish? > >: ) > >Bob D. I don't think this is the case, and I'm sure you're joking, but I guess they all have read Crafty's source. And probably they got at least one interesting idea they implemented (IIRC, I read that latest Fritz doesn't take the trojan horse, for example). The fact is that as soon as you know something, you can't prevent it from affecting your future decisions. I might read Crafty now, not take any single idea, and come up with a new (to me) idea in 2010 that is in Crafty today. I can't be sure whether I invented it because I had forgotten Crafty or I just got it from the deep of my most forgoten memory... Is it "bad" that other programs have Crafty's ideas? I don't think so. It's bad to copy and paste a move generator or an evaluation function, but if you read, understand, and then put the idea in your program I don't think it can be bad in any sense. José C.
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.