Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:08:05 05/28/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2005 at 18:38:51, Cesar Contreras wrote: >To all of you: > >It seems to me like a witch hunting, i don't mean it's a bad thing to search for >justice, what i mean it's that many are taking conclusions too quickly. I don't >say "Fafis it's not a clone", but if it is, the evidence it's not conclusive. > >In the other hand, i see many efford (people/hours) in order to probe fafis it's >a clone ... i hope there are at least some people thinking in some ways to probe >it is not a clone... that can be called justice. > >"guilty until probed the opposite" it's just plain bad (some are taking out >fafis from their tournaments). Why don't wait a little more? why the hurry? > > >Some things i like to add: > >- I'ts important to know the names of the other 3 engines that made the same >moves as crafty in the draw game. The others must be clones also or this >evidence it's irrelevant. I agree that it is important to know the name of the other engines. > >- I'ts important to know the name of the other engine that made the same move as >crafty in the mate on one. The other must be a clone also or this evidence it's >irrelevant. I also agree. > >- Crafty it's a center of knowledge in chess programming, so having programs >that behave the same in some aspects or some positions don't seem to me that >suspictious. No Crafty is not the center of knowledge. > >- The strings "captured a king" and "feature rejected by xboard" are not a good >evidence. >- The code needed to generate moves, parse FEN it's a little part of a chess >program, you can't say it's a clone based on that little parts. No I do not agree that the code of generating moves is a little part. The data structure that is used for the move generator is used also for other things. >- The virus thing can happen to all we engine authors, we are confident in our >antivirus, but virus are first then antivirus, and some virus simply desactivate >the antivirus. I think some pleople here just closing their mind, i can imagine >a loot of ways the virus can get into the exe (worm mutation, worm >modification, bad information from antivirus companies). You can suspect that >Rafael append the worm himself, but you can't be for sure. > >As an engine author myself i think (IMHO) that the evidence it's not conclusive, >i can imagine it's not dificult to find similar behaviors on some aspects on >very diferent engines. > >With all my respect i think you must be more carefull when you release this kind >of information, it must be released when you have enought evidence to probe it. >Maybe you are rigth and Fafis it is a clone, but maybe not and one person it's >damaged. > >To the engine authors: > >- How many % of code make an engine a clone? >- How many lines of code make an engine a clone? >- How many % of fafis it's crafty code? >- then how do you know it's a clone? >- suposing you got conclusive evidence tell that Move generator and FEN parser >it's crafty code? how mutch % of the code it is? Not important. It is illegal to do it. >- How do you feel if your engine it's declared a clone when you know it's not? >You know you took some ideas from here or from there, but you know it's not a >clone? >- What it's the way to clean your name? I am not afraid of it. I am quiet sure that people will never find big similiarities like they found in Fafis or Partiot to some free source code. Movei has a lot of original datastructure that was not copied from another program so I do not believe that it can show the same behaviour like another program. probaility is so small that it is practically 0. Uri
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.