OpenChess

Who currently holds the title as computer chess biggest liar? I think positions number 1 & 2 are quite tough; could it be a tie?

kingliveson wrote:Who currently holds the title as computer chess biggest liar? I think positions number 1 & 2 are quite tough; could it be a tie?

Houdini wrote:Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Now that Houdart has gone from slimy evasion to outright lying, he's my current vote for #1!

Jeremy

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

kingliveson wrote:Who currently holds the title as computer chess biggest liar? I think positions number 1 & 2 are quite tough; could it be a tie?

Houdini wrote:Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Now that Houdart has gone from slimy evasion to outright lying, he's my current vote for #1!

Jeremy

Where did you get that quote?

kingliveson wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

kingliveson wrote:Who currently holds the title as computer chess biggest liar? I think positions number 1 & 2 are quite tough; could it be a tie?

Houdini wrote:Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Now that Houdart has gone from slimy evasion to outright lying, he's my current vote for #1!

Jeremy

Where did you get that quote?

Tiens! http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 819#427819

I'm pretty appalled by the new separation of CC-enthusiasts into an dippy majority who just says "who cares, as long as it's strong?" and a bitter, aggravated minority who thinks this is a big deal. It is a big deal, and it's only the tiny amounts of money at stake in commercial computer chess (although I presume that R.H. is making a decent living on someone else's hard work), and the relatively small clientele that keep this stuff out of court.

jb

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

kingliveson wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

kingliveson wrote:Who currently holds the title as computer chess biggest liar? I think positions number 1 & 2 are quite tough; could it be a tie?

Houdini wrote:Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Now that Houdart has gone from slimy evasion to outright lying, he's my current vote for #1!

Jeremy

Where did you get that quote?

Tiens! http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 819#427819

I'm pretty appalled by the new separation of CC-enthusiasts into an dippy majority who just says "who cares, as long as it's strong?" and a bitter, aggravated minority who thinks this is a big deal. It is a big deal, and it's only the tiny amounts of money at stake in commercial computer chess (although I presume that R.H. is making a decent living on someone else's hard work), and the relatively small clientele that keep this stuff out of court.

jb

*sigh*

Is there anything more aggravating to the mind of a sane individual than a bold face lie?! Especially when the liar knows you know s/he is in-fact being dishonest, yet continues. May be in December, I'll take another look at Houdini 1.0.

thorstenczub wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote: I'm pretty appalled by the new separation of CC-enthusiasts into an dippy majority who just says "who cares, as long as it's strong?" and a bitter, aggravated minority who thinks this is a big deal.

ok lets stone him.
...

Eh, no? People should know what they're buying, though, and there's no particular reason why other chess programmers should breathe the same air as Houdart does. Compare Houdart to Norman Schmidt -- Houdart is a genius for adding some tasty, buttery Elo to someone else's code and Schmidt a mere parasite when he does the same?

I can't understand how you can say "liar, thief" to a Vasik Rajlich, to a Norman Schmidt, and not to a Robert Houdart -- why are you defending this?

Jeremy

i am not defending vas rajlich .
i am against stoning and witchhunts.

vas rajlich participated with his program on championships where you are only allowed to participate with YOUR OWN program.

IMO we are human beeings. and because we are , we should not stone people like the religious people all over the world have done it in the 2000 years of history.

thorstenczub wrote:i am not defending vas rajlich .
i am against stoning and witchhunts.

vas rajlich participated with his program on championships where you are only allowed to participate with YOUR OWN program.

IMO we are human beeings. and because we are , we should not stone people like the religious people all over the world have done it in the 2000 years of history.

So anti-cloning, but also anti-talking-about-it (because that would be a witch hunt)? Sure sure...

jb

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

thorstenczub wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote: I'm pretty appalled by the new separation of CC-enthusiasts into an dippy majority who just says "who cares, as long as it's strong?" and a bitter, aggravated minority who thinks this is a big deal.

ok lets stone him.
...

Eh, no? People should know what they're buying, though, and there's no particular reason why other chess programmers should breathe the same air as Houdart does. Compare Houdart to Norman Schmidt -- Houdart is a genius for adding some tasty, buttery Elo to someone else's code and Schmidt a mere parasite when he does the same?

I can't understand how you can say "liar, thief" to a Vasik Rajlich, to a Norman Schmidt, and not to a Robert Houdart -- why are you defending this?

Jeremy

Funny you should bring up the Norm comparison whom when confronted with trying to sell a modified open-source program, did the honorable thing by refunding the money. I am going to assume Gerd is not aware of the current discussion because if you were to read the profiles of both individuals on http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/People, it might leave you scratching your head.

kingliveson wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

thorstenczub wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote: I'm pretty appalled by the new separation of CC-enthusiasts into an dippy majority who just says "who cares, as long as it's strong?" and a bitter, aggravated minority who thinks this is a big deal.

ok lets stone him.
...

Eh, no? People should know what they're buying, though, and there's no particular reason why other chess programmers should breathe the same air as Houdart does. Compare Houdart to Norman Schmidt -- Houdart is a genius for adding some tasty, buttery Elo to someone else's code and Schmidt a mere parasite when he does the same?

I can't understand how you can say "liar, thief" to a Vasik Rajlich, to a Norman Schmidt, and not to a Robert Houdart -- why are you defending this?

Jeremy

Funny you should bring up the Norm comparison whom when confronted with trying to sell a modified open-source program, did the honorable thing by refunding the money. I am going to assume Gerd is not aware of the current discussion because if you were to read the profiles of both individuals on http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/People, it might leave you scratching your head.

Maybe someone needs to write an Open Letter to get his attention...

jb