Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 06:32:07 11/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 2003 at 08:17:31, Palmer wrote: >I just remembered that some time ago there was a discussion here on CCC if >ruffian is a crafty clone or not. >Here some comments form robert hyatt to that topic: > >...I agree. The real test is in tactics. It is not easy to make a copy of >Crafty either better or worse at tactics, but particularly making it better is >non-trivial. It's far easier to twiddle with a few eval terms to make it >play significantly different... > >...In the case of Ruffian, I'm not sure it is anything at all, other than >a very unlikely happening. >Ruffian could be any of the following, in decreasing order of probability: >1. A copy of a freeware engine with some changes or additions. >2. A copy of a commercial engine, aided by a hex editor to change strings >to disguise what has happened. >3. A copy of a commercial engine, modified, after someone found access to >the un-released source code somehow. >4. A program written by a current commercial (or amateur) author and released >anonymously, for reasons I wouldn't try to guess. >5. A completely new program, developed by a completely new author, sight- >unseen by anybody until very recently. >It _could_ be any of those. I don't have an opinion yet, except that the >above list is written in decreasing probability order.... I think that if you're not prepared to give your full, real name (as the rules of CCC require), you don't get to make stupid and venal accusations about people. I believe that you posted your message purely to troll. I believe that you owe Per-Ola Valfridsson an apology. I believe that you are too cowardly and too weak to apologize as you should. Andrew Williams
This page took 0.01 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.