Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:15:52 05/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2005 at 19:00:23, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 12, 2005 at 18:43:54, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On May 12, 2005 at 18:26:32, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On May 12, 2005 at 18:20:12, Robert Hollay wrote: >>> >>>> When you buy Delphi, you automaticaly get rights to use certain libraries >>>>in your CLOSED SOURCE projects. Whereas with GNU GPL licence (Fruit) >>>>you have rights to modify the sources, but they must remain open. >>>> On the other side, I'm not sure that making chess engines open source was a >>>>good practice. People could share ideas, algorithms, code samples, etc... but >>>>when >>>>a magician reveals ALL his tricks to the public, then the magic disappears ... >>> >>>Which is (of course) a good thing. >>> >>>>Computer chess is a hobby, a game, a competition, and not so vital to the >>>>human race that one is supposed to share all his secrets with others. >>> >>>The algorithms of chess are benefical for many things. It is an abstract search >>>of a complicated solution space. There are many tasks in life that can use the >>>same ideas. >>> >>>>Exactly these little secrets can make it exciting! >>> >>>Hiding information is for lazy people. C. A. R. Hoare inveted a sort routine >>>called quicksort a while back. He showed other people how to do it. What an >>>evil man?! >>> >>>> And just one more thing. If you place a well-laid table full of delicious food >>>> in the centre of a city full of starving people, then you shouldn't expect >>>>that the table remains untouched ... maybe in fairy tales! >>> >>>If you publish a book, you should expect people to steal it then? >>> >>>>Robert >> >> >>If you've read a book full of smart ideas, is it your position that you are NOT >>allowed to use the new ideas in your own work? I don't understand why you read >>books at all, if that should be your position. >> >>The same is it if you use parts of open sources which have impressed you in your >>own work. >> >>Dann, before I ask some more questions to your other message, could you give me >>your opinion about the following? >> >>Are you absolutely sure that for example SHREDDER, to take just the actually >>best program, is absolutely without any ideas or code from such open sources? >>Even I as lay can imagine that someone with enough talents could hide or >>re-write such code to make him appear innocent. And to the best of my mind I >>didn't hear about a human being other than Stefan who has seen Stefan's code. >> >>I do NOT claim that SHREDDER contains any forbidden parts. My question was if >>you could prove if there were such code. >> >>What do readers think about it? > > >I think that it is impossible to prove that shredder does not contain forbidden >parts and that people can have enough talent to appear innocent. > >This is the reason that a lot of people are against open source code chess >programs. Those people are nitwits.
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.