Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:29:01 08/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 1999 at 17:04:01, Zachariah Amela wrote: >O >>I have suggested that the only reasonable way to control cheating is to control >>the client software. ICC ought to take their blitzin interface, and modify it >>and the server so that blitzin is the _only_ interface that will work. And then >>they can take countermeasures inside blitzin to address the cheating issue, >>without having all the other interfaces that would not have the countermeasures >>included. >> >>Until that happens, it is hopeless... > >How about FICS? Should they/could the alter Blitzin to be their only client? > >Also, isn't Blitzen only for Win right now? I could be wrong. What about >Unix/Linux/Solaris, Mac and NeXT users? you reach the heart of the problem. Do you (a) eliminate cheating almost completely by providing a closed client-to-server package that uses some clever encryption to prevent unauthorized access? And, at the same time, take on supporting a dozen different platforms with all the work that entails? or (b) ignore the problem because it takes a huge amount of work to do (a). Right now, (b) is the course of action everyone follows. But sooner or later, something is going to have to be done... perhaps one idea is to provide a 'certified' client that authenticates itself with the server, and give members the choice of only playing certified clients on the other end. Still allow the many non-certified choices, but make everyone aware that they may well be a pirate's den of sorts... > >> >>Not quite what I said. I gave some patches to Tim Mann (for winboard/xboard) >>that recongizes when the opponent is in the 'computer' list. It will then >>tell the chess engine by sending a command "computer" to the program. If a >>person is using a computer, and has a (C) on their handle, then this code works >>fine. But it doesn't work if the person is 'cheating' as it won't have any >>idea the guy is using a computer. >> > >Understood. > > >> >>Not that I can verify. I can't think of another GM that hasn't, however, from >>Karpov on down. I tend to think Kasparov has not played Crafty, because the >>last comment I saw from him was something like "It is weak, actually". Of >>course, I'd be more than happy to take him on in a blitz match to see how weak >>it really is. :) > >Hmmm.....limited comment form Mr. Kasparov. One thing Crafty isn't, is weak. I suspect Kasparov knows what I think about his mannerisms in NY. And that was just a 'dig' in the reverse direction. Plus he is supporting ChessBase commercial engines with various sorts of public endorsements. I'm not losing any sleep over it, because I get plenty of contra-comments from a host of other GM players, including a couple that saw Kasparov's comments and labeled them "stupid" or "ignorant" (the GM's words, not mine...) > >> >>But actually, playing him isn't a real priority of mine, because if Crafty won, >>we'd have to put up with whining about poor conditions, too noisy, the computer >>had help, etc. IE there would be _no way_ to win against him... even to win >>would be to lose, IMHO. > >Lol! Whatever do you mean? Lol... > >> >>I prefer to play all the other GM players that _do not_ have the obnoxious >>attitude. There are plenty of them, with Kamsky right at the top of the list, >>but with many others that are equally as congenial. > >Interesting. Do you have PGN games of Crafty vs. Gm's? Thanks! I actually have pgn for _every_ game crafty has played on the chess servers. About 100-200mb last time I looked. But I don't have any good way to extract things. I wrote a small C program to go thru and extract results so that I can tell you how many wins/losses/draws/disconnects for any handle you want...
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.