Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:11:02 05/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 2005 at 08:12:02, Peter Fendrich wrote: >On May 12, 2005 at 19:15:52, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>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. > >I had to look that word up! >What ever they are they still hurt the computer chess community and one have to >fight back in some way. I share your ideas in general but there is something >with chess engines that makes a difference. It is not commercials versus >amateurs, we have that in many areas where open source works perfectly without >harming anyone except for maybe the sales figures of the commercial product. I am guessing that sales of the commercial products increase because of the amateur engines. Here is why: When you try some exciting strong engine like Crafty or Movei and watch it play it gets into your blood. You play a ten game match and get beaten to a bloody pulp. You go online and get excited about FICS or ICC. You play tournaments and watch the WMCCC, etc. After a while, you see the incredible performance of the stronger programs. You want to match the strongest amateurs against them or play them against each other or analyze positions or openings with them. I started out with only free engines like Arasan and Gnuchess and Crafty. But now I have a copy of just about ever chess engine that there is except for private ones. I think it is similar with database systems. Jose and SCID are wonderful, but eventually you will buy ChessAssistant or Chessbase. I am guessing that most people who own free engines eventually buy professional engines and the same for the database systems. And for those few that do not, they would never have bought the professional systems anyway. Of course, I am guessing through the lens of my own experience, so I could be wrong about it. >IMO >it's the competition part. People loves to compete with their engines and others >just love to arrange tournaments. >Isn't this unique? As in all other sports and competitions there are cheaters, >don't ask me why but they are all over the world in all kind of competitions... >This is the part that makes the open source programs troublesome. > >I also have a feeling that there is a big difference between "real" open source >projects where people are participating in developing the same software and just >put up open source for download. If we had a number open source projects instead >of 200 engines, the situation would be different. > >If the main amateur TD's only included open source programs maybe the majority >would release their source - I would :-) >What do you say Leo, Günther and all others? ;-) > >/Peter
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.