Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: define Clones - MY definition / Ethical Background

Author: Thomas Mayer

Date: 03:59:52 01/29/04

Go up one level in this thread


Hi Rolf,

just about Dennis Grafen -> he came up with two clones - first he did hack a
Tiger 14 or 15 and after that he changed some texts in Pepito and claimed it
again as his own work... That is well known... You might look in the archives of
CCC - search for Deep <9>... At least Mr. Grafen admits both clones and
apologizes...

Of course Fritz R. innocent until proven guilty, we fully agree in that.


> We have a scene where the programmers _all_ copied from the past
> inventions. This is for certain!! Nobody could claim that he had invented his
> program from scratch. But _nowhere_ there is a note what is taken from where.
> Professionals are _never_ doubted anyway.

hm, when you mean that old ideas are rewritten then you are right - but I am
very sure that most programs are written from scratch with unique data
structures and different implementations of the known and not so known
algorithms. Maybe here I am to naiv ???

Besides, I am not professional -> and I never complained about anyone in the
past and do not want to do so in the future... and I have said this already
somewhere: I have had enough material sent by someone about another suspicious
engine in Graz... There are many engines that are better then Quark - anyway I
have fun in the competition with them. List is definitely stronger then Quark
and if it is or was really Crafty based it is an outstanding effort to get it
that strong. No doubt about that.

You might be right that this would have handled different with professionals...
this is no good -> anyway what should be changed ? Should any organisation
simply ignore any complaints about clones ? About copying from others by Cut &
Paste ? Or should professionals be treated the same then Amateurs ?

As it seems we have already another "scandal" at the upcoming CCT6... how should
that be handled ? Should it be ignored ? Show me some alternatives, then we can
maybe discuss about it - but only critizising what has been done is really a
little bit to easy...

> There is no clarity in advance! Everybody could be the next victim of
> suspicions.

well, if someone finds strong enough evidence... but thats not so easy as you
think...

> In reality however this will never be someone of the better professionals.

Okay - again, show me a way out -> how should cloning be handled in future ?
Simply ignored ?

> Bob Hyatt made the neccessary comments. But as it seems nobody listens or
> wants to listen.

I haven't seen it - I do not follow every discussion at CCC -> thats simply to
much to read each day...

>> It was neither weak nor pseudo ! For programmers it was enough to get
>> suspicious.

> But it was so weak that the one who brought up these suspicions is still
> anonymously hiding. Why? If the case is so clear?

It is his decision... I understand this -> he has not done anything wrong - he
did feel uncomfortable with one of the participants and ask the TD how to handle
this... What else should he do ?
And now he does hide - the reason is also simple: He does not want to get kicked
ass from persons like you... for not having done anything wrong - at least from
my point of view...

>> Of course it is unsure what a professional would do in such a situation -
>> well, so far it did not happen... (Maybe I am wrong and Bob can tell us
>> some story's from history)

> Thomas, this is indecent. And I tell you why. Because Bob already made things
> clear enough but you and the ICGA won't listen.

Where ? As I already said - I did not read everything here... I simply can't...
so show me please !

> Here I tend to agree with Frank Q. who wrote here [only in German
> unfortunately] the surprising possibility to simply ignore the whole ICGA
> lame excuses and practices and create new organisations and events!

Maybe it's a good idea - but you will not get rid of the problem with clones...
you must find ways how you can discover clones, how you handle complains etc....
again, show me alternatives instead only point with fingers on others...

> But you are unaware of what I told you, namely that you are in extreme stress
> during examinations and this alone could explaine and excuse some
> communications.

Well, there is something which should definitely be changed. For the
championship one of the team member must be at the tournament site... No
Operators allowed at all anymore... And the team member must be experienced
enough to explain questions and source to the TD... Any new or old Organisation
should handle it that way... Operators are a real problem - also the experience
of the CCTs show this...

> When will you begin to include ethical concepts into your engineering modes?

We are talking about competitions and how to find rules that fit to all the
problems that can arise... How will you handle strong evidences and suspicious
stuff in the future ? I just ask you again ?

> he could be a DG, but he could also be a new Richard Lang.

He could be both in person, who knows...

> Is this too hard to bare for you, V. and JC?

Who is JC by the way ?

Greets, Thomas



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.