Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 11:03:21 03/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 05, 2004 at 13:55:16, Thorsten Czub wrote: The fact that i have been telling you guys this for tens of times in the past years without Karlsson ever denying it should be enough proof. I remember also a statement from SSDF that they would only test commercial products with the commercial book as published at the cdrom. 2 months later Bart Weststrate told me he got a question from SSDF to ship an updated book in order to 'kick some more butt' at the SSDF list with Kallisto at the time. Bart, at that time not being at the internet, of course had missed this announcement of SSDF completely. So Bart cannot be blamed here. In general i do keep my emails, but not what was shipped to my university adresses. Everything ever shipped to diep@xs4all.nl i still have. SSDF had me for many years attached at my university email adress and i no longer have access to this university email. So if i look back at old harddrives here with some luck i might find it, if it was forwarded to diep@xs4all.nl, otherwise i won't. In general speaking, Ed just knows too f'ing well what goes on in SSDF that it's amazing that after so many years he wants to see proof, whereas the first few times i posted this, no one asked. >On March 05, 2004 at 12:35:23, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>Show the email. >> >>Ed > >in public ? > >wouldn't this be against the charta or against PC ? > >IMO this topic is to hot for talking about it in public. >whatever you talk, it will in the end result in offending and insulting >stuff. IMO this looks more like a misunderstanding by Karlson. It happens often >ln life that people say: "oh - we have not enough time, and even if we would >have enough time, we don't have the resources to do this or that." > >I guess it was a misunderstanding. > >This is also IMO not interesting. More interesting for me always were the system >immanent failures in the list. > >E.g. it would have been better nor to accept a SPECIAL non standard autoplayer >system. the system of donninger, later enhanced and brought into windows >stanbdard by stefan works. why inventing the wheel again. there was absolutely >no reason to accept another standard that is a pain in the ass for all other >devlopers. here is the problem. > >IMO a system is as good as the will of the involved people to make the best out >of it. it would have been a better idea to use the normal stuff that is e.g. in >shredder-classic GUI, in CSTal (that was a copy of stefans code), in ARENA or >even in all the DOS programs instead of accepting this misleading and idiotic >chessbase autoplayer. > >Not to talk about the engine-engine stuff, that produces strange results due to >all kind of stupid commands and behaviour during computation.
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.