Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 16:11:47 05/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2005 at 18:09:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >On May 12, 2005 at 15:41:11, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>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. > >I do not understand your question. I was surprised that you can use dozens of programs and you could still claim that you've created your own program? > >>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.) > >If the source code for a software product is available, cloning means to take >that code, add a few tweaks, and say that you did it. Yes, I see, but if you say anything at all, is it still cloning? In almost all of your statements you claim sort of judicial law while I am talking about the creative process similar to a science. Do you really believe that in science certain public findings would be ignored if that is actually a helpful key for your own work? Think about politically or militarily research... > >A similar thing is to take part of it and put it into your program. That is not >cloning but might be a copyright violation depending upon the restrictions of >the original source code. > >If you say nothing then your project is copyright. That means it CANNOT be used >without written permission. I don't understand. You mean you can copyright an idea? > >If you say GPL, then anyone can use it, but their project must also become open >source. > >If you say Public Domain, then the project can be used by anyone for any purpose >that they like. There are many other license types. Let's think that someone doesn't inform the public at all, where is the guilt? I see two situations where guilt could become relevant. a) championships and b) business. > >>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. > >You are mistaken. The interface to a program is not copyrightable. This has >been established worldwide through many court cases. I can write a program that >does the same thing as your program. It can even look extremely similar to your >program. The violation occurs if you take my code and do not follow the rules >associated with the thing that you took. And all the creative inventions of chessBase could be stolen? Or copied? This is IMO a bad practice. So, I don't understand why Arena is the best that was created in computerchess, something Mike has declared. I simply can't understand it. > >>IMO the >>autheticity of a creative performance would ONLY exist IF the whole presentation >>would be DIFFERENT to that of ChessBase 8 or 9. > >This understanding is definitely not correct. Ok, maybe, but what Vladimir did, that was wrong? > >>But if in the end all features >>and menues are the same (with meaningless changes by chance) then it's a clone >>IMO. > >No. Let's debate without getting into justice and law. > >>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. > >Making a program much stronger might be one or two lines of code, or even less >-- to repair a bug it might be one character changed. Yes, and why should that be forbidden? In sports? > >>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. > >I agree. But if you use Fabian's code, your project must be open sourced and >also GPL licensed. Otherwise, it is actually illegal. As I asked you, who could ever prove a famous program to contain forbidden code? > >>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? > >When you violate the license agreement of the tool that you are using. Are ALL other programs except Patriot checked on such a problem? > >>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? > >There is clear evidence that Patriot is PROBABLY a clone. It is not proven. I >have never said that it is proven. It is (however) quite likely. Thanks for this clarification. But if that is the case so far, not proven, I would prefer not having read the ironical, sarcastic questions to Vladimir Yelin. Just a surprise in such a community. > >>>>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? > >If he uses an open source program then he must abide by the open source license. And in computerchess we have police officers who control all programs on such violations? > >In the same way that I cannot copy a book and change a few lines and say that >the new book is mine (despite the public nature of the book) I cannot do that >with a program either. So if I want to use it, I must obey the restrictions >that are attached to the project. But Nullmove and all these tricks could be taken into your program... Interesting. Sorry for the sarcasm from my side. Just to initiate a lively debate. > >>>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 0.01 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.