Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:35:48 02/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 1999 at 19:03:33, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Hi Bob: >After returning from my holydays I just come here and I see again the discussion >about Crafty. The issue has returned in force, so it seems. Great that it is so >because touches a foundamental issue. The proof of it is that any sparkle kindle >the fire again. Let me add a little bit of charcoal to it saying that I see some >confusions here. Confusions that are dangerous for you. But if they are MY >confusions, then explain me them to me to learn a little more. >Confusions are, I believe, the following ones: >a) confusion between how good or desirable -or not- is to give something for >nothing AND the use of it that some people with an ethic of a 2 dollar whore as >Bob said, can do of it. >b) confusion between the field of freeware, generosity in the giving and taking >of ideas, etc, all that world that Bob see and recall with some nostalgy, and >the world of sheer egotism, money, fame, commercial enterprises, etc. >c) confusion about the status of this field: it is a science or a kind of it >where, like any other, it need perpetual share of ideas to grow OR it is just a >technical endeavour where the eseential point is personal reputation, money, >etc, anything that can be got trogught better means. > >If this is a science, you, Bob, has done what is the very best thing to improve >and push progress, no matter what, no matter cheaters, no matter abuse. A >scientist is a public man. Is a man that makes publics his statements. No >scientist just could do as fake scientist of cartoons inventing awful and secret >things. That's has to do with power, not with science. And chess programming has >an advantage over other fields: you can go beyond just publishing general >statements or formulas; you can show the real thing in detail. That's what you >have done and I think you did well, even if you maybe is now thinking >differently. What you did is good and desirable even if some people made bad use >of it. The full field of sciences is prone to that mischance. my concern is this: I released the source to this program to make public what I consider to be 'state of the art'. No I don't do everything I want to do, yet... as this is still a 'research' project to me, and I want to try to try everything slowly and carefully. But my intent, from day one of deciding to release it, was to let beginners have a starting point for their programs with some 'software engineering' type data (what has worked, what has failed, what has worked after several failed attempts, etc (by reading main.c carefully). What I have done, intentionally though it may be, is to wreck a couple of chess tournaments already. Because now there are at least _two_ programs that are essentially crafty, with a few minor changes (IMHO). Which means beginners are competing directly with me, without knowing it. And that can definitely be discouraging. IE if everyone had had a chess 4.x clone, my first chess tournament might have been my last. Because instead of winning 3 of my first 4 tournament games (ACM events were 4 rounds back in the 1970's) I would have lost all 4, and probably given up. At present, it is easy to sit back and say "by giving your source, you have done everyone a big favor." But I suspect that 'history' won't be nearly so kind, unfortunately... > >Of course this is ALSO a commercial endeavour and then a problem arise. A kind >of ambiguity if you want, that permeates the entire field. As you gives, other >guys try to take; as you thinks in science and progress, other people thinks in >money, fame, rewards of any kind. And this is OK but surely creates some >collisions. You gives and Ed -or any other commercial programmer- hides, of >course. How should he do otherwise? You give and a couple of guys take the >weaponry of Crafty and get a personal rewards. Sad, but that does not diminish >the general benefit the field has got from your gift. I disagree here. If a beginner gets wiped out by another beginner, it can be discouraging. If he 'knew' it was "Crafty" this might be different, but not knowing, he concludes "wow, I got killed, this isn't for me." The early chess types had a different set of values that prevented this sort of nonsense. But no more, it seems. Yes, most apples aren't bad. But the number is growing day by day... sadly... I only regret that I unknowingly chose to 'start the ball rolling'... >In fact that's the way progress go on all around. Do you know an example in any >art or technology where you are not going to meet the same kind of >superpositions and conflicts? And even so the most selfish guys that takes just >thinking for themselves play a part in the great Opus because, in a way or >another, they put some improvement in what they steal or copy, they stimulate >even more creativity precisely to surpass the followers and cheaters, etc, etc. >Private and selfish apropiation of an idea is unfair and ugly, BUT is part of >the process trought which private ideas becomes publics and so wheels of the >collective machinery towards progress. Had you kept secret your source code, >these guys of Bionic were not capable of doing Bionic, sure, BUT the entire >field would be poorer, less advanced. Is that the great thing just to avoid a >bad use of something? >Bob, let me say you again that you did well, with generosity and a wide and deep >vision. You are part of the history, past and present, of this field; that is >not going to change no matter what. And so this is no the moment to going back. >Sad would be that you, hearing so many advices about not to give nothing >anymore, take the advice and becomes a lesser man that you was and you are. You >are the scientist and although scientis are human and, as any other human being >looks for personal rewards, they distinguish themselves because the reward they >try to get is the respect and admiration of his colleagues and the laymen >capable of at least understand a bit of what they have done; that you already >have it. Let other people trying to get forgetable prices in forgetable >torunaments. Let other guys trying to earn a living with the secrecy of his >products. Let other people confunding you with any other kind of programmer, >jealous of HIS ideas. But you, let you to be yourself. >Fernando
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.