Author: Will Singleton
Date: 13:37:03 02/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 1999 at 16:27:21, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 15, 1999 at 16:08:35, Will Singleton wrote: > >>On February 15, 1999 at 15:13:18, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On February 15, 1999 at 15:04:15, Will Singleton wrote: >>>[snip] >>>>But regarding your main point, this has been discussed before, and it's of >>>>course up to Bob to make that decision. However, the cat is out of the bag as >>>>far as the source goes, in it's present form it will be stronger that any >>>>amateur program for the near term. So restricting it will have little effect >>>>(the effects having already occurred). >>>> >>>>Long term, though, it would be a good thing to take it private. >>>New programmers, coming on to the scene, will be severely stunted. It is a >>>very, very, very bad thing. Only it may become a necessary thing. Tragic, in >>>my mind. Of course, GNUChess is strong and freely available. So now what? >>>Hide the source of a copyleft program? >> >>GNUchess isn't in Crafty's league. There are only 8 GNUchess clones on ICC, as >>opposed to 175 active crafty clones. I think that indicates something. >True, but on sufficiently advanced hardware, it seems to do pretty well. Better >than a large fraction of current ameteur programs. > >If we just want the most primitive programs, then perhaps only TSCP gets >exposed. >If we want to share the most advanced techniques, then we only write papers >about it but not share code (apparently). So that means that the advanced >techniques will be harder to learn than before. State of the art stuff is very >hard to absorb without an example. Something that is very complex often has a >simple base explanation, but the devil is in the implementation details. >Without seeing that sort of thing, every programmer will have to cross the same >hurdles that have already been discovered. > >What it means is that now we want to hide some work. That's because there are >those round about who are unscrupulous and will use the information for selfish >purposes without being willing to expend their own effort. > >Paraphrasing: >A few stinkers spoil it for everyone else. >Typical. Exactly. Will
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.