Author: John Merlino
Date: 16:06:05 06/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 10, 2005 at 18:12:56, Christopher Conkie wrote: >Hello John, > >This original post is to do with the discovery of the capabilities of ALL >engines. Yes, you can discover what is under the hood of clones as well as >original engines by this method. > >Someone recently asked me if (in a qwivering voice I might add) if I could apply >the same with method to commercial engines of a very distinct format. The answer >at that point was no. > >Now, it is yes. > >X-ray eyes are now reality. > >I should point out that illegal and legal positions can be used to do this and >that a large number of positions is required to gain "a complete feel" for an >engine. > >It follows that because we can discover the genetic makeup of an engine, that we >can trace their respective histories. > >We can determine from whence they came. If they came from other stock and were >passed off as legitimate and oringinal works, we will know it, from now on and >retrospectively. > >There is no point in rushing to program the rules of chess (as is proper) into >an engine. That should have been done long ago and is a telling enditement of >shoddy workmanship or just plain code duplication. > >Forget strength, forget eval.....how about starting with the rules first. > >That would be a really good idea..... > >It's too late to start covering tracks now. The game is over. We have gained all >the information we require already. > >I would rather have an engine with new and original ideas that played like a pig >than have an engine that is 2600 (maybe sold) and cobbled together from the >efforts others. > >If you are a "group" say so and put it on the outside of the packet or in the >information that is bundled with the engine. > >Don't con me (and yourself)......because I will know it and it would be very >counter-productive for computer chess and untimately for you. > >It must be like being "ratted on" by your closest friend. The engines reveal >their roots and there is nothing that can be done now by anyone. > >I can tell you that plagarism is alive and well (but not for long) in both the >amateur and commercial markets. Programmers talk to each other, swap things. > >How much is what is being found out here.....and it does not look good. > >That is the problem with chess engines. They are calculators. I am here to tell >you that the equation "x + y = z" is very easy to solve if I know both "x" and >"z". > >Sometimes "y" is a large number which makes calling the program "z" somewhat of >a lie. > >Most importantly, can someone please tell me why it is that engines that are >sold for playing chess, do not understand the rules of chess? > >Circumstancial evidence? No these are fingerprints and they do not lie. > >Christopher Ok, I get the point. But you would do better to avoid all the secrecy and game-playing, and just start naming the engines for which you are making these accusations. And, for the record, I know that none of the engines you used in your initial post are The King, because I know that if it is given an illegal position it will produce no analysis output. The GUI might accept the position if you paste it (but not if you attempt to manually input it), but The King will not try to do anything with it. jm
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.