Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 19:31:37 02/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 1999 at 21:17:25, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On February 25, 1999 at 17:34:07, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>On February 25, 1999 at 08:35:07, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>On February 25, 1999 at 08:06:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >><snip> >>>>Nope.. 'position learning' still works so it still won't 'repeat' losing >>>>lines forever. >>> >>>Noop. you can't write your learning files. See below >>> >>>>>For every protocol one can invent such things. We have a protocol to >>>>>play each other, now unless the protocol is the protocol of a fool, >>>>>we can expect that we use a chessgame to fight, and not the protocol. >>>>> >>>>>For every protocol you make i can make my own autoplayer that prevents >>>>>you from learning! >>> >>> >>>>I'll take that bet... this is just 'incomplete programming'. The auto232 >>>>protocol doesn't allow one side to prevent the other from learning. If the >>>>program requires some 'key' from auto232 to 'learn' that is a bad design. If >>>>the program depends on N games with the same color, that is a bad design. But >>>>I'll bet you can play crafty all the auto232 games you want it _it_ won't fail >>>>to learn whatever you do. Even if you hit ^C to terminate it in the middle of >>>>a game, it will 'learn'. >>> >>>Before we start playing i simply writeprotect your directory. >> >>!! And how would you go about doing this? >> >>If you went to such great lengths to prevent opponent's learning, it would be >>cheating. However, simply doing something a little different than 'everyone >>else' (alternating colors, etc.)is doing is NOT cheating. >>Here's a small exaggeration, but it gets the point across (I hope :) - If your >>program depends on the opponent sending the string 'learn' for its learning to >>work, and this is the way 'everyone else' does things, it would be cheating for >>my autoplayer to not send 'learn'?? > >Let's not do naive. There was a protocol. Protocol was clear. then someone >writes his own protocol, yet gets ratingpoints because he plays old protocol, >AND THAT WAS EXACTLY THE PURPOSE. I don't think it was a protocol (to play x games with each color in a row, or to send some command to enable learning, or whatever); it was just the way 'everyone else' did it. The only protocol in auto232 is the mechanism that sends the moves (and other information) back and forth, ends the games, and starts new games. Which program gets which color and for how many times, etc. have nothing to do with the protocol. In my hypothetical situation, wouldn't it just make more sense to learn regardless of what the opponent does? Just because someone does something differently than you (and everyone else) and it happens to 'break' your program, does not mean they are cheating. >Implementing the source of stefan and chrilly is easy. quickly done. >Making your own auto232 protocol+player only can have one reason. > >That reason is obvious. It is clear, yet SSDF has fallen for it. > >One question remains: SSDF said after 5.16 that they would not accept >a program anymore that doesn't have an autoplayer that is generally >available. Now they play also with 5.32. Now when i'm consequently applying >their rules, does this mean that 5.32 has an autoplayer incorporated?
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.