Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 08:53:49 10/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 1999 at 11:18:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 31, 1999 at 02:08:57, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On October 30, 1999 at 12:04:18, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>>The long thread which is esentially a discussion between Bob H. and Ed S. has >>>something surrealistic in it. Bob is -or was- arguing that commercial guys does >>>not contribute to the field because they are secretive of his little tricks and >>>just like to make technical profit from non commercial guys ideas; Ed is saying >>>-or said- that's not really true, as much this and that technique was delivered >>>by this or that commercial programmer. >>>Bob is the purest case of non commercial, not money interested reasercher and >>>his child Crafty the paradigm of the freeware world; Ed is the purest case of >>>professional commercial progammer, enterily dedicated to that since ever, with >>>the best developed commercial site, constant attention to his customers, etc, >>>etc. How guys so opposed in needs, interest and position in life can even meet >>>in a common ground to share even a definition about what is the issue under >>>discussion? >>>Ed earns a life selling his products and so he should be a fool to give his >>>relatives advantages to his competence; the esence of his work is to keep his >>>trade secrets the longest time he can. Bob is a scientist that earns his life >>>teaching and researching in an university; the esence of his work is becoming >>>public the soon as possible to get recognition from his peers and help his field >>>to give another step. >>>So clearly they cannot cut a deal even it such thing appears to happen due to >>>good manners and a mutual desire to end the discussion with some kind of >>>diplomatic uinderstanding. They even does not understand in the same way what is >>>a new idea. For Bob is just matter of who was the guy that first wrote about the >>>discussed issue in a scientific magazine; for Ed is a matter of who was the guy >>>that put the idea to work in an efficient way. The same with colaboration; for >>>Bob, as scientist, is about sharing concepts and discoveries; for Ed, as a >>>commercial guy, is a mater of cooperation for mutual -not universal- benefice. >>>Ed is prepared to share his ideas with Theron because both of them are joined in >>>a common commercial adventure; as much as he does so, he surely see himself as a >>>man that cooperates after all for the advancement of the field. For Bob nothing >>>less than to communicate his thought to the entire world is enough. >>>Who is right' Nobody is. They are different persons in differents situations, >>>each of them doing his best and producing universal benefice in dfferent ways, >>>one direct, the other more indirect. And we need both approachs. What a >>>scientist can get in the atmosphere of university campus probably concnetrates >>>in the area of pure research; what a commercial technics can gets the better is >>>getting general ideas works better and better. Sooner or later both ways meets >>>and the entire field jump o a higher level. >>>Fernando >> >>I don't think I would behave different if Rebel wasn't a commercial program >>regarding contributions. For me the item of competing would remain decisive. >> >>Ed > > >My only comment would be: > > "thank goodness that Newell, Shaw and Simon, I.A. Goode, Richard Greenblatt, > Slate/Atkins, Thompson, Truscott, Kozdrowicki, Campbell, Marsland, Hsu, > Beal, Nalimov, Hienz, Cracraft, Donninger, Myself, Nelson, Berliner, Goetsch, > Daily, Kaufman, Feldman, ... enough already ... didn't agree with you. > Imagine where computer chess would be today if _they_ had decided that > 'the item of competing would remain decisive...'" > >I don't even want to think about it... > >I understand limited-duration secrecy. But not 'forever'. I've been giving >source away forever. There is a guy on ICC (bigblue) that is running a copy >of blitz he got from me in 1978, although he has modified it over the years so >that it is hardly 'blitz' any longer. But it got _him_ started. You are a professor and this is what a professor is supposed to do. Good for you, I really mean it. But you can afford it because you have a tenure position. Were your beans depending on Crafty, you wouldn't be able to give your source. This is, to me, the point that makes your position unrealistic when you demand commercial programmers to reveal their findings. They give other things to the CC community: strong engines, great features and interfaces. This is their contribution, and a very valuable one. Enrique
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.