Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Review of ALEXS by Larry Kaufman

Author: Fernando Villegas

Date: 05:08:29 02/17/99

Go up one level in this thread


Hi Dan:
Yes, what a happyness to return to discussing again!!!
Well Dan, we certainly have different conceptions about property. I know you are
right in the strict legal, formal sense in many of the points you have made, but
not being myself a lawyer  I am not compelled to act or behave or think
according strictly to them, neither to confuse a legal definition as a true,
philosophical, deep, eternal definition of the Being. Ideas are of nobody in my
opinion, no matter you was the first guy to formulate them. Yes, there is a
payment to the first guy, money, fame, etc, but in strict sense Humanity is the
owner, the entity that made possible even the language with which we think, to
begin with.
My articles? They are something different because they are terminated, definite,
dead things in a sense. And the meaning of this kind of things is not to perform
a feat in chess or any other task where what matters is perfomance, but the
thing in itself, measured in his own terms. A poem is not "more poetic" than
another, just different and better or worst according to taste of the reader,
but not "more" or "less". Of course literature is anyway a process and then a
guy can take some of my methods, techniques and apply them in his work, etc.
That's the way writers begins his careers, taking ideas and methods of other
guys. A great french poet said that a new writer should begin ever copying "as
the only way to become himself". Paradoxical but true. Programming is not a
terminated thing, programs are. So when you take the source of a program you are
really taking something from a terminated product -and then your reasonning is
OK- but as much that program is at the same time just a part of a general
process of programming and as much you take all that for becoming a new link in
that process, then the same conception about stealing, abuse, etc are not
anymore so definitive. I want to belive that the first part of the equation, to
take from the terminated product, is less important than the second, to become a
new link in the chain of progfress. Of course sometiomes that does not happens,
maybe rarely happens, BUT the likelihood to this last thing to happes is what
matters. as Bible said: "I will save Sodoma even if this little number of decent
people live there". I say: let Crafty be freefor the sake of the few decent guys
that wiill use it to make another jump to the future.
Greetings from astroship Damnation
Fernando



This page took 0.01 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.