Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Clones and moral behavior

Author: Bo Persson

Date: 09:47:37 08/24/05

Go up one level in this thread


On August 23, 2005 at 16:50:48, José Carlos wrote:

>  I agree with you and Uri about there's no clear definition of what a clone is.

Of course there is, if you have copied the code it's a clone. If you have
written it yourself, it is original.


>"Having source code of other engines" is miles away from clear. Example: I have
>in my code:
>
>int i = 0;
>
>  Either it is in some prior program (I'm a cloner) or in some later program (he
>cloned me -early versions of Averno were open source-).

Yes, but did you think of this line yourself, or did you paste it from another
program?


>  Of course copying that line is not cloning.

Of course it is!!

If you copied the code, you know it's a clone. The only problem is to prove that
when the cloner lies about it.

There is a difference between whether someting is true or false, and if you can
prove that. The cloner knows. It's much harder for everyone else.


>But then, what is cloning? Copying
>5 lines? 10? 100? Only some specific lines? Maybe some "magic" numbers in
>evaluation?

Copying or retyping other code is cloning. Writing it yourself is not. Very
simple!

>  So please, if someone has an exact definition, post it here.

"Copying or retyping other code is cloning. Writing it yourself is not." :-)

>  BTW, I strongly disagree about everyone's tempted to clone. What's the fun of
>seing other people's creating winning games? What is really fun for me is seeing
>_my_ creation winning games. I'll never be able to understand what anyone can
>get from copying other's work.


The same reason some athletes use doping. You might win the competition!


Bo Persson



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.