Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 16:09:14 05/29/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 2005 at 15:08:17, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >On May 29, 2005 at 11:35:42, Vasik Rajlich wrote: > >>On May 29, 2005 at 08:25:02, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >> >>>On May 28, 2005 at 12:29:33, Günther Simon wrote: >>> >>>>On May 28, 2005 at 12:20:00, Vladimir Elin wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi Alex, >>>>>I think that reason for you to use only engines with open sources and delete >>>>>all engines were you can see words : alpha, beta, prunning and many many etc. >>>> >>>>Vladimir that is really a dumb post after all... >>>> >>>>Guenther >>>> >>>>>You idea that Patriot 2.0 is clone - full absurd. >>>>>Best. >>>>>Vladimir. >>> >>>Is it really such a dumb post ? I am not sure - whenever someone mentions >>>"clone" , I am skeptical - inspite of the number of clones that are discovered. >>>I prefer to give the author the benifit of doubt - a genourously large benifit >>>at that. >>> >>>Nothing is opensource programs is a "secret" , I mean - even if they were not >>>opensource , the amateur (and definitely professional) authors will have arrived >>>(or already have) at them independently : by expiriments or through available >>>docs. I dont really see any ground breaking code or idea in any of the >>>opensource engines today - all are straight forward implementations of the >>>standard theory. >>> >>>Most , if not all , clone accusations show as "proof" something really dumb - >>>like string search , result in a single position , behaviour of a parser (which >>>is _not_ part of the engine as such people !) , etc - maybe these are the only >>>possible ways to identify clones (I am not sure - and as I have posted before , >>>I dont really care much) , but based on such flimsy grounds people should not >>>accuse others. >>>When you accuse a program as a clone - you are also maligning the reputation of >>>the author : which is the more serious thing IMHO. >>> >>>What Vladimir Elin is hinting at is that (I think) , people (usually non-chess >>>engine programmers who know quiet little about the programming aspects) see >>>something/anything strange (in their eyes) and cry wolf. >>>Like a string search which returns strings - which might be what is defined in >>>the pgn spec , or a binary search which returns data match (whcih might be de to >>>a generated parser for pgn handling for book) , etc ! >>> >>>Ofcourse wachful people are always needs to see the hints which will lead to the >>>identification of many clones , but IMO we need a better way to decide how to >>>identify clones. >>> >>>The current process seems to be : 1) Accuse 2) Flame 3) Author defends 4) >>>mudslinging 5) Nasty posts - brining the author's whole family history to the >>>ground 6) Challenge (to show source) 7) If 6 accepted , cleared , else branded >>>as clone. >>> I dont know about others, but no I am never going to send my source code to >>>someone I dont personally trust - even if the rest of the computer chess >>>community might seem to. >>>Not everyone knows what the non-opensource guys are doing in their code : and >>>personally I do many a stupid things , but I might have something interesting >>>too :) >>> >>>So why have opensource engines ? - different question anyway , we wont discuss >>>that since it is largely an authors decision. >>> >>>We should try to promote the number of amateur engines so that as many people as >>>possible should enter this field - not discourage people. (both within >>>reasonable limits ofcourse) >>> >>>Mridul >> >>Mridul -- >> >>First of all, your post makes me wonder if you are familiar with the Patriot 2.0 >>situation, but anyway those things are boring for me so let's talk philosophy >>for a second :) >> >>I've had the good or maybe bad luck to spend at least 3 years living in five >>different countries, and I can make a certain observation. In two of these >>countries - USA and Germany - society essentially works. Wages are decent, crime >>is kept down, things just work. In three of these countries - Hungary, Czech >>Republic and Poland - no offense intended to anyone, but they just don't work as >>well. People steal from the government without getting punished, people cheat on >>their jobs, nobody is willing to deal with various problems, etc. >> >>What's the difference? A huge difference is that in Germany and USA, people >>essentially care. If they see something wrong, they report it and attempt to >>rectify it. This goes from cleaning up a small mess on the road, to calling the >>police if the neighbor is beating his family, etc. Throughout Eastern Europe, >>people are apathetic - and everybody suffers as a result. >> >>Sometimes, it can seem a bit too much. I remember I had this impression when I >>first came to the US - why is everybody so concerned with things that aren't >>their business. In the overall picture, though, society is better for it. >> >>So I certainly appreciate that there are people who are going to look into these >>things and do something about it, rather than just endlessly holding their >>tongue for fear of being out of line. Without it, computer chess will just be a >>mess. >> >>Vas > >Hi Vas, > > Like I mentioned myself , we need people who will point out the >errors/suspicions. >But these are just that suspicions - a 35% binary match of the executables (egtb >will account for that ;-) ) , a small set of common strings , a bug in the fen >parser (I have seen multiple people misread/misinterpret the same spec - there >will be grey areas even in the most well written specs) , etc are not enough by >a long shot to accuse something as a clone - they can be indicators of a >potential clone at best. > >I visit CCC less and less nowadays - and each time I do so , a new program seems >to be accused of being a clone : personally I dont care , it is a hobby for me , >something I use to fill my remaining freetime with when I am not busy with other >opensource projects I am involved with - but true , there are people who take it >seriously and for them and for the future (if not for other reasons) we should >try to keep this field as clean as possible. > >But that should not be at the expense of any tom dick and harry coming out and >accusing programs of being a clone. >That is why I said - we should have a better process for clone issue : how clone >suspicions are raised , how they are probed into , how they are proved/disproved >, etc : a bunch of amateurish tests should not be the basis of flame wars here. >Makes the whole forum (and field for that matter) more and more unreadable and >uninteresting. > > The analogy you raised is not really valid in this context (IMHO :) ). >I wrote a long response in this space on that - and then removed it. >That is not the matter we are discussing here :) - it will most probably only >expose my ignorance of the issues concerned since I have never physically been >to the places mentioned like you though I am made aware of the ground realities >through my friends. > >Anyway , you are correct about the first point - my understanding (from what >little I read among the accusations and counteraccusations that kept flying >around) was that Patriot 2 was accused of being a clone , author did not expose >the source code , branded as a clone by the community here based on the >circumstantial evidence found (I read a few - maybe I missed a lot more) and the >ones I read looked not very solid to me (I have not done any research on Patriot >and never used it for that matter , so likely that I am missing the finer points >of the Patriot2 clone issue). > >My main problem with these accusations is that : > >1) People here follow the maxim guilty until proven innocent. > >2) Sensationalism in the accusations - I see more and more of this in the media >where it is better to say something bad to get the max amount of publicity and >attention : same thing is being "imported" into CCC. > >3) In general , it is the author's reputation which is more at stake than the >program as such , and mudslinging is affecting the author's reputation (the >accusations might or mightnot be correct). >Hence , even if something is disproved - the result is not going to remove the >damage already done to it ! > >"An arrow which leaves the bow and a word which leaves the mouth cannot be taken >back" - an old saying here :) > >I believe in "Innocent until proven guilty" too much (it might be a >cultural/upbringing thing, not sure) , which is why these discussions disturb me >more. >Very few people seem to stick up for the author in general - like Peter Skinner >seems to be doing right now (just skimmed through the posts now) , the more >vocal group are the ones who are accusing. The others seem to be maintaining a >studied silence - true , you should try not to react until you get all the facts >- mark of a wise man , but sometimes it galls me when the more vocal group makes >the community believe in an issue just because they keep repeating it and the >others dont challenge or respond until everyone believes it ! >I have seen way too many "discussions" of this nature in other forums online and >now recently in CCC also. >Justice happens when both sides are looked at impartially : assuming people are >really interested in getting to the roots of the problem. (which most of us in >CCC here are I assume). > >Note : even now I am not really saying whether the programs are clones or not , >I dont have the data , unfortunately neither the time to investigate , or the >patience for it right now and really appreciate the work people are puttig in >this work. > > >Thanks, >Mridul Hi Mridul -- Ok there is no way I can write something intelligent at this hour :) There is a balance of course between persecuting too many innocents, and defending too many who are guilty. I guess I don't see this particular cause as very attractive. Here is some more stuff about it: http://www.uciengines.de/UCI-Engines/Patriot/Patriot2/hauptteil_patriot2.html But frankly - I don't really care. :) Vas
This page took 0.05 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.