Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 12:41:11 05/12/05
This was coming from the thread Re: A Critic against Public Burning of young
Talents in Computerchess
+++++++++++++++++++++
On May 12, 2005 at 10:51:38, Uri Blass wrote:
>On May 12, 2005 at 10:40:30, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On May 12, 2005 at 06:16:29, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>
>>>On May 11, 2005 at 22:29:40, Mike Byrne wrote:
>>>
>>>>Enjoy life and just read what you want to read and enjoy the people that you you
>>>>like to be with. Life is too short for anything else.
>>>
>>>Mike, you are a very wise man.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Best,
>>>>
>>>>Michael
>>>>
>>>>ps Thank you and Martin for Arena - the best free chess product made thus far
>>>>in this century!
>>>
>>>I must say this to the benefit of science. Nobody ever has researched the source
>>>code of ARENA.
>>
>>Not so. I have gone through the string table for Arena. It is written in
>>Delphi, so it could port to UNIX using Kylix.
>>Here is the list of dlls and binaries referenced:
>>\pifmgr.dll
>>\system32\pifmgr.dll
>>_isdel.exe
>>accuclck.exe
>>advapi32.dll
>>arena.exe
>>Av_BookBuilder.exe
>>BLDINDEX.exe
>>BookBuilder.exe
>>BookEdit.exe
>>cb3dviewer.exe
>>comctl32.dll
>>comdlg32.dll
>>CTL3D32.DLL
>>DGTEBDLL.DLL
>>dos4gw.exe
>>ELOStat.exe
>>explorer.exe
>>gdi32.dll
>>gnuchesr.exe
>>GradualTest.exe
>>HolmesCfg.exe
>>IMM32.DLL
>>install.exe
>>InstallCC.exe
>>kernel32.dll
>>notepad.exe
>>oleaut32.dll
>>PSAPI.dll
>>regedit.exe /s
>>Restarter.exe
>>RICHED32.DLL
>>setup.exe
>>shell32.dll
>>Speedtest\gtest.exe
>>start MSINFO32.exe
>>tail.exe
>>timeseal.exe
>>timestamp.exe
>>uninstall.exe
>>user32.dll
>>vcltest3.dll
>>winboard.exe
>>winmm.dll
>>winmsd.exe
>>wsock32.dll
>>
>>
>>You can see all the custom controls and the formats and pretty much everything
>>about the organization. Arena does not contain amazing new algorithms or
>>anything like that. What Arena represents is thousands and thousands of
>>man-hours of incredibly tedious GUI work.
Dann, I have some questions for you.
The "tools" above - they could be used, and it wasn't "cloning" in your view.
Now I have a missing part in my understanding as non-expert for programming. Do
you say (with others or all) that say - someone has a final product before his
eyes (a product from the leading company) that IF you are clever enough to write
down several thousands of lines in your own style (how could that be if
programming is using a specific language? What is the important thing in
programming? Knowing the language and then describe the orders or is it
important to solve thousands of problems to express what the program should do?
Excuses to all for my naive questions, but they are important for me to
understand where abilities reign or where simple cloning is taking place.)
I understood you until now as if the mere expressing of code is already a
creative performance. However I say that if I look at ChessBase 8 or 9 and ask
myself, well, how should I state my code so that the result is similar to
ChessBase, is it still authentical performance? I doubt that. IMO the
autheticity of a creative performance would ONLY exist IF the whole presentation
would be DIFFERENT to that of ChessBase 8 or 9. But if in the end all features
and menues are the same (with meaningless changes by chance) then it's a clone
IMO.
Could you explain exactly where I may be wrong in the above? Or anybody else
please. I can only say that I almost smell that something is totally wrong in
the debates. And therefore I was already in opposition in the famous LIST case.
It's ridiculous in my eyes if a program is so good, much better than the model,
to then search for similarities (sic!) which couldn't explain why then the new
product is much better than its model. How important is it then to debate a
possible "cloning"? As Fabien expressed, we all base on former models and it
makes no sense to force people to always invent new the old models.
Could you try to explain where it becomes a crime or fraud or where it's simply
a learning process on the base of former creative products?
I would be very thankful to all input.
That is not a topic in favor of Vladimir Velin; no, it's the analysis that could
constitute a new beginning of creative chess programming, where young talents
can concentrate themselves on NEW tasks and challenges without losing time with
always doing the same what already had been done by former collegues.
>>
>>>So far. I just want to mention that during the Patriot debate in
>>>other fora there were opinions that the authenticity of many other software was
>>>never analysed. Simply because nobody had access to the specific products. This
>>>is the same for professional products in computerchess and also for such FREE
>>>works like Arena. What we do know is that the main pieces of computerchess
>>>programming have been used by almost all prtogrammers. There nobody would claim
>>>the term fraud.
>>>
>>>I finish this message with the hint, that in Franks Quisinsky's News pages he
>>>presents an interview with the programmer Fabien T. of the alleged original of
>>>Patriot 2. The interview was led shortly before the Patriot 2 debate came up. I
>>>can only say that Fabien gave very interesting comments on that topic of copying
>>>certain contents of programming a chess software! He can't see the problem...!
>>>But we here produce a public withch-burning. I'm still against such public
>>>attacks against young talents, no matter how wrong they are. Criticising Hsu, a
>>>veritable academic, or attacking Bob, a veritable Professor in Computer
>>>Sciences, this is a completely different thing like to bury the young man from
>>>Bela-Russia. Please excuse my emotional appeal.
>>
>>Patriot has NOT been proven a clone. There is compelling evidence to suggest
>>that it MIGHT be.
Dann, how does that confirm with what you wrote one or two days ago? I can find
the exact URL if you want. You were the highest expert (to my knowledge) who
made a clear verdict. Why? If it's not clear?
>>
>>In the case of Patriot, I think that there is special concern since it is sold
You mean Patriot 2?
If Vladimir is able to program on his own a machine with 2500, how then would it
be a fault if he now tried to enter a higher class by simply basing his program
on a already stronger model? With open source?
>
>I think that patriot was proven to be illegal because there is too much
>similiarity to have reasonable doubt.
Uri, could you try to answer the above questions I have? Where is the limitation
of similarities?
>
>I will not discuss the meaning of the word clone but it is clear that the
>programmer did not take ideas from fruit(it is legal) but simply copied the code
>and made small changes.
Yes, Uri, maybe, but why do you argue as if this collegue had decided to stop
programming now? As if he now would want to stop with a copy of another program?
Wasn't he a good collegue before with the 2500 program? Wasn't that already a
good performance?
Excuses if such questions could sound like insults to programmers because these
questions do come from a naive lay like me!
Rolf
>
>Uri
This page took 0.02 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.