Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: guilty until probed the opposite

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 05:59:26 05/30/05

Go up one level in this thread


On May 30, 2005 at 08:40:31, Cesar Contreras wrote:

>>The proofs shown would be enough for every court.
>
>Not be so sure, as you can see many people think your probes are inconclusive.
>Thanks god on most countries justice it's a little more advanced than this.
>
>>The probability that an engine have the same behaviour in all of the above cases
>>is 0,0000000005% (one of 2 Billion), and it's calculated in order to be on the
>>safe side.
>
>How did you got this number?  I think it's unfounded.

Very simple
0.02*0.01*0.01*0.1*0.05*0.05=1/2,000,000,000

The numbers 2% or 1% or 5% or 10% are already mentioned in his post.



>
>>didn't try to explain one of the similaries this are enough proofs for me.
>
>I don't have fafis source to really determine if it's a clone or not. All i have
>are your inconclusive evidence and the fact that i think rafael really knows
>about chess programming, he is able to make a chess engine from scratch.

It proves nothing.
A programmer can also make a clone and make a chess engine from scratch.

Uri



This page took 0.03 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.