FIDE Rules on ICGA - Rybka controversy

[Chris Whittington]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

Why don't you try and get back to a more friendly computer chess? You are not the FBI. Some guy gives CSVN his source when asked, they look at it and say ok. But this is not good enough? This is during a tournament - there is time pressure - you want to check every last thing like some prissy law enforcement agency? If CSVN decide to believe the guy, having seen source, WTF are you to challenge them? Get real and get reasonable and stop creating trouble, as it is you go down in history as one of the prime movers in the biggest and most unpleasant and unnecessary affairs in computer chess, all to get yourself a title it would seem. It's only a game. Of chess. Between computers. Not such a big deal for the nasty, suspicious stuff. Is it?

So any old source code can be provided and no comparison to what is actually playing will be made? Thanks for your useful reply, as always. btw the similarity test is conducted before the tournament not during.

It would be entirely up to the CSVN whether or not they choose to accept the programmer's source as "real" or not. They may know the person in question, or have information you don't. Your questioning of this case (I have no knowledge of it) is just another in a long line of suspicious unfriendly acts where you play Police Chief, as if in some banana republic. Thses tournaments should be friendly events, not ones in which you run around casting suspicions and then declaring somebody else's due process as not up to HW standards. hahaha.

[Harvey Williamson]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

Why don't you try and get back to a more friendly computer chess? You are not the FBI. Some guy gives CSVN his source when asked, they look at it and say ok. But this is not good enough? This is during a tournament - there is time pressure - you want to check every last thing like some prissy law enforcement agency? If CSVN decide to believe the guy, having seen source, WTF are you to challenge them? Get real and get reasonable and stop creating trouble, as it is you go down in history as one of the prime movers in the biggest and most unpleasant and unnecessary affairs in computer chess, all to get yourself a title it would seem. It's only a game. Of chess. Between computers. Not such a big deal for the nasty, suspicious stuff. Is it?

So any old source code can be provided and no comparison to what is actually playing will be made? Thanks for your useful reply, as always. btw the similarity test is conducted before the tournament not during.

It would be entirely up to the CSVN whether or not they choose to accept the programmer's source as "real" or not. They may know the person in question, or have information you don't. Your questioning of this case (I have no knowledge of it) is just another in a long line of suspicious unfriendly acts where you play Police Chief, as if in some banana republic. Thses tournaments should be friendly events, not ones in which you run around casting suspicions and then declaring somebody else's due process as not up to HW standards. hahaha.

I am not questioning the case. I am just saying you need to be sure the source provided matches the exe that plays.

[Chris Whittington]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

Why don't you try and get back to a more friendly computer chess? You are not the FBI. Some guy gives CSVN his source when asked, they look at it and say ok. But this is not good enough? This is during a tournament - there is time pressure - you want to check every last thing like some prissy law enforcement agency? If CSVN decide to believe the guy, having seen source, WTF are you to challenge them? Get real and get reasonable and stop creating trouble, as it is you go down in history as one of the prime movers in the biggest and most unpleasant and unnecessary affairs in computer chess, all to get yourself a title it would seem. It's only a game. Of chess. Between computers. Not such a big deal for the nasty, suspicious stuff. Is it?

So any old source code can be provided and no comparison to what is actually playing will be made? Thanks for your useful reply, as always. btw the similarity test is conducted before the tournament not during.

It would be entirely up to the CSVN whether or not they choose to accept the programmer's source as "real" or not. They may know the person in question, or have information you don't. Your questioning of this case (I have no knowledge of it) is just another in a long line of suspicious unfriendly acts where you play Police Chief, as if in some banana republic. Thses tournaments should be friendly events, not ones in which you run around casting suspicions and then declaring somebody else's due process as not up to HW standards. hahaha.

I am not questioning the case. I am just saying you need to be sure the source provided matches the exe that plays.

And how do you the CSVN did not feel sufficiently assured already?
One problem with "technical" people is that, when presented by a multi-faceted problem, they come up with technical solutions, and then more technical solutions to the problems thrown up by the technical solutions. You want to see the guys source? Ok, you see the source. Ah, but maybe this isn't the "real" source, so let's compile it compare to his exe. Now he has to release his exe to you. Ah, but maybe he had a hidden partition on his PC that contains Stockfish, which is really the program playing, or cleverly playing some of the moves. So now you want to investigate his PC. When do you stop with this? May I perhaps remind you, that an assumed to be innocent person, has already been offended by the accusation and demand to see his source. Now you want to offend him more by suggesting maybe he is lying about the source? There was some "evidence" that perhaps his program was suspect, so you ask for the source. Is there also evidence he is a congenital liar, so you don't believe him? I talk about "technical" people with technical solutions, because you miss the humanity angle - once accused, you turn the guy into an object, not to be trusted, must be totally checked out. Do you not see this is no way to behave by you, at a friendly tournament? You are not inquisitorial police, not a STASI - I hope? Get some humanity and sense of proportion, Harvey, stop with this madness. It's just a computer chess tournament, not life and death.

[Harvey Williamson]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

Why don't you try and get back to a more friendly computer chess? You are not the FBI. Some guy gives CSVN his source when asked, they look at it and say ok. But this is not good enough? This is during a tournament - there is time pressure - you want to check every last thing like some prissy law enforcement agency? If CSVN decide to believe the guy, having seen source, WTF are you to challenge them? Get real and get reasonable and stop creating trouble, as it is you go down in history as one of the prime movers in the biggest and most unpleasant and unnecessary affairs in computer chess, all to get yourself a title it would seem. It's only a game. Of chess. Between computers. Not such a big deal for the nasty, suspicious stuff. Is it?

So any old source code can be provided and no comparison to what is actually playing will be made? Thanks for your useful reply, as always. btw the similarity test is conducted before the tournament not during.

It would be entirely up to the CSVN whether or not they choose to accept the programmer's source as "real" or not. They may know the person in question, or have information you don't. Your questioning of this case (I have no knowledge of it) is just another in a long line of suspicious unfriendly acts where you play Police Chief, as if in some banana republic. Thses tournaments should be friendly events, not ones in which you run around casting suspicions and then declaring somebody else's due process as not up to HW standards. hahaha.

I am not questioning the case. I am just saying you need to be sure the source provided matches the exe that plays.

And how do you the CSVN did not feel sufficiently assured already?
One problem with "technical" people is that, when presented by a multi-faceted problem, they come up with technical solutions, and then more technical solutions to the problems thrown up by the technical solutions. You want to see the guys source? Ok, you see the source. Ah, but maybe this isn't the "real" source, so let's compile it compare to his exe. Now he has to release his exe to you. Ah, but maybe he had a hidden partition on his PC that contains Stockfish, which is really the program playing, or cleverly playing some of the moves. So now you want to investigate his PC. When do you stop with this? May I perhaps remind you, that an assumed to be innocent person, has already been offended by the accusation and demand to see his source. Now you want to offend him more by suggesting maybe he is lying about the source? There was some "evidence" that perhaps his program was suspect, so you ask for the source. Is there also evidence he is a congenital liar, so you don't believe him? I talk about "technical" people with technical solutions, because you miss the humanity angle - once accused, you turn the guy into an object, not to be trusted, must be totally checked out. Do you not see this is no way to behave by you, at a friendly tournament? You are not inquisitorial police, not a STASI - I hope? Get some humanity and sense of proportion, Harvey, stop with this madness. It's just a computer chess tournament, not life and death.

As i suspected you are not interested in solutions just creating anarchy. My question was addressed to Ed. I will wait for his reply on this as I agree with him the similarity tester is a good first step.

Because the similarity test is done before the tournament nobody needs to know who was singled out for more tests. It can all be done in private.

[Chris Whittington]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

Why don't you try and get back to a more friendly computer chess? You are not the FBI. Some guy gives CSVN his source when asked, they look at it and say ok. But this is not good enough? This is during a tournament - there is time pressure - you want to check every last thing like some prissy law enforcement agency? If CSVN decide to believe the guy, having seen source, WTF are you to challenge them? Get real and get reasonable and stop creating trouble, as it is you go down in history as one of the prime movers in the biggest and most unpleasant and unnecessary affairs in computer chess, all to get yourself a title it would seem. It's only a game. Of chess. Between computers. Not such a big deal for the nasty, suspicious stuff. Is it?

So any old source code can be provided and no comparison to what is actually playing will be made? Thanks for your useful reply, as always. btw the similarity test is conducted before the tournament not during.

It would be entirely up to the CSVN whether or not they choose to accept the programmer's source as "real" or not. They may know the person in question, or have information you don't. Your questioning of this case (I have no knowledge of it) is just another in a long line of suspicious unfriendly acts where you play Police Chief, as if in some banana republic. Thses tournaments should be friendly events, not ones in which you run around casting suspicions and then declaring somebody else's due process as not up to HW standards. hahaha.

I am not questioning the case. I am just saying you need to be sure the source provided matches the exe that plays.

And how do you the CSVN did not feel sufficiently assured already?
One problem with "technical" people is that, when presented by a multi-faceted problem, they come up with technical solutions, and then more technical solutions to the problems thrown up by the technical solutions. You want to see the guys source? Ok, you see the source. Ah, but maybe this isn't the "real" source, so let's compile it compare to his exe. Now he has to release his exe to you. Ah, but maybe he had a hidden partition on his PC that contains Stockfish, which is really the program playing, or cleverly playing some of the moves. So now you want to investigate his PC. When do you stop with this? May I perhaps remind you, that an assumed to be innocent person, has already been offended by the accusation and demand to see his source. Now you want to offend him more by suggesting maybe he is lying about the source? There was some "evidence" that perhaps his program was suspect, so you ask for the source. Is there also evidence he is a congenital liar, so you don't believe him? I talk about "technical" people with technical solutions, because you miss the humanity angle - once accused, you turn the guy into an object, not to be trusted, must be totally checked out. Do you not see this is no way to behave by you, at a friendly tournament? You are not inquisitorial police, not a STASI - I hope? Get some humanity and sense of proportion, Harvey, stop with this madness. It's just a computer chess tournament, not life and death.

As i suspected you are not interested in solutions just creating anarchy. My question was addressed to Ed. I will wait for his reply on this as I agree with him the similarity tester is a good first step.

What an utterly ridiculous statement. I am objecting your NOT accepting that the CSVN satisfied themselves on the program in question by simply applying their rules and not then going down the suspicion path, recommended by you, of not believing a word the accused (and innocent) programmer said. You are the anarchy creator, by generating stress and anger amongst those you treat as objects. Allow, Harvey, these tournaments to run on a friendly basis without your STASI inquisition, else you destroy computer chess. Maybe you already have.

[Harvey Williamson]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

Why don't you try and get back to a more friendly computer chess? You are not the FBI. Some guy gives CSVN his source when asked, they look at it and say ok. But this is not good enough? This is during a tournament - there is time pressure - you want to check every last thing like some prissy law enforcement agency? If CSVN decide to believe the guy, having seen source, WTF are you to challenge them? Get real and get reasonable and stop creating trouble, as it is you go down in history as one of the prime movers in the biggest and most unpleasant and unnecessary affairs in computer chess, all to get yourself a title it would seem. It's only a game. Of chess. Between computers. Not such a big deal for the nasty, suspicious stuff. Is it?

So any old source code can be provided and no comparison to what is actually playing will be made? Thanks for your useful reply, as always. btw the similarity test is conducted before the tournament not during.

It would be entirely up to the CSVN whether or not they choose to accept the programmer's source as "real" or not. They may know the person in question, or have information you don't. Your questioning of this case (I have no knowledge of it) is just another in a long line of suspicious unfriendly acts where you play Police Chief, as if in some banana republic. Thses tournaments should be friendly events, not ones in which you run around casting suspicions and then declaring somebody else's due process as not up to HW standards. hahaha.

I am not questioning the case. I am just saying you need to be sure the source provided matches the exe that plays.

And how do you the CSVN did not feel sufficiently assured already?
One problem with "technical" people is that, when presented by a multi-faceted problem, they come up with technical solutions, and then more technical solutions to the problems thrown up by the technical solutions. You want to see the guys source? Ok, you see the source. Ah, but maybe this isn't the "real" source, so let's compile it compare to his exe. Now he has to release his exe to you. Ah, but maybe he had a hidden partition on his PC that contains Stockfish, which is really the program playing, or cleverly playing some of the moves. So now you want to investigate his PC. When do you stop with this? May I perhaps remind you, that an assumed to be innocent person, has already been offended by the accusation and demand to see his source. Now you want to offend him more by suggesting maybe he is lying about the source? There was some "evidence" that perhaps his program was suspect, so you ask for the source. Is there also evidence he is a congenital liar, so you don't believe him? I talk about "technical" people with technical solutions, because you miss the humanity angle - once accused, you turn the guy into an object, not to be trusted, must be totally checked out. Do you not see this is no way to behave by you, at a friendly tournament? You are not inquisitorial police, not a STASI - I hope? Get some humanity and sense of proportion, Harvey, stop with this madness. It's just a computer chess tournament, not life and death.

As i suspected you are not interested in solutions just creating anarchy. My question was addressed to Ed. I will wait for his reply on this as I agree with him the similarity tester is a good first step.

What an utterly ridiculous statement. I am objecting your NOT accepting that the CSVN satisfied themselves on the program in question by simply applying their rules and not then going down the suspicion path, recommended by you, of not believing a word the accused (and innocent) programmer said. You are the anarchy creator, by generating stress and anger amongst those you treat as objects. Allow, Harvey, these tournaments to run on a friendly basis without your STASI inquisition, else you destroy computer chess. Maybe you already have.

i still play in these tournaments unlike you who has not turned up for decades. Keeping the tournaments friendly means not allowing cheats. If you are going to run the similarity test as Ed suggests then you need to check the results in a meaningful way.

[Rebel]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

I am aware there was an incident. I wasn't there. What I know is hearsay. [Q] have you witnessed it?

[Harvey Williamson]

The CSVN wasn't deaf to the idea and the old chairman Cock de Gorter took the initiative using the SYM tool as independent arbiter for participation. The new leadership (Marcel & Richard) moved things to a new level, improved the software and fine-tuned the procedure. Perfect? No. Like in cycling and other sports they will have to adapt and adapt to new situations as cheaters will find new ways, but they are ready for it. Ask them, share knowledge.

This tool is useful for giving an indication. What happens next when a high similarity is found? There was one case when a program entering the CSVN tournament gave a higher than expected result. Source code was asked for and provided. The program was then passed as being ok. However no attempt was made to prove that the source code matched the engine that was playing. The provided source should be compiled and compared to the exe that is playing in the tournament.

I am aware there was an incident. I wasn't there. What I know is hearsay. [Q] have you witnessed it?

I am not interested in this individual incident. Just that you have to be sure that the source supplied matches the engine that plays.

[marcelk]

I am not interested in this individual incident. Just that you have to be sure that the source supplied matches the engine that plays.

The CSVN uses a small checklist for inspections. This is mentioned in the checklist. This is also the reason the rules require the programmer to provide access to the development environment if deemed needed.

[Harvey Williamson]

The CSVN uses a small checklist for inspections. This is mentioned in the checklist.

Good to know you have at least 2 checklists