Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:46:49 02/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 1999 at 22:31:37, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >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. Instead of naive scientific way of thinking, let's think a little commercial. Why would chessbase spend a lot of time making its own auto232 player, where implementing the protocol for the donninger/meyer-kahlen auto232 player is just a matter of minutes? >>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.