OpenChess

Posted: **Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:28 pm**

A question for Harvey Williamson? In the talkchess forum you wrote "IMHO it would not be accepted at WCCC. It is based on the decompiled source of another engine." (http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=)

In the rybka forum you wrote (http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=19968) " By Harvey Williamson Date 2010-12-25 12:03 Unless they just take the easy route and copy someone elses hard work. It would be a nice idea to shut some of today's so called 'original' engine programmers in a closed room with people like Mark and Stefan and gve them all a blank sheet of paper. How many would be able to produce an engine that plays fairly strong Chess in a reasonable ammount of time. I suspect some of the authors of supposed 3000+ engines would not even complete the task.

By Harvey Williamson Date 2010-12-25 12:49 I could take the so called top engine change 1 parameter and recompile wow I now have my own number 1 engine - easy!

By Harvey Williamson Date 2010-12-25 13:31 Closing a website is not the same. Anyway happy Christmas all. I hope you all continue to find ways of making yourselves feel good about playing with your stolen presents.
aurevoir time to eat the Turkey I PAID for. I doubt many of you even paid for the Rybka you use,

So my question is: Are the free engines "decompiled source of another engine" or are we playing with stolen presents?

Posted: **Sun Dec 26, 2010 5:05 pm**

Don't waste your time with this guy ..... he is the most hypocrisy and puppet chessbase guy I know

hypocrisy = is the state of pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have.

Posted: **Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:25 pm**

I'm still wondering how Mark and Stefan (presuambly) manage to get a 3000+ Elo engine using only a blank sheet of paper.

Posted: **Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:37 pm**

While I don't agree about some the conclusions HW typically makes regarding certain engines, I do think that trying to ferret out the history and pedigree of such is a useful task. Regarding this, here is an old TalkChess post from VR.

Subject: Re: About Fafis...
From: Vasik Rajlich
Message Number: 428751
Date: May 29, 2005 at 11:35:42

[...]
I've had the good or maybe bad luck to spend at least 3 years living in five different countries, and I can make a certain observation. In two of these countries - USA and Germany - society essentially works. Wages are decent, crime is kept down, things just work. In three of these countries - Hungary, Czech Republic and Poland - no offense intended to anyone, but they just don't work as well. People steal from the government without getting punished, people cheat on their jobs, nobody is willing to deal with various problems, etc.

What's the difference? A huge difference is that in Germany and USA, people essentially care. If they see something wrong, they report it and attempt to rectify it. This goes from cleaning up a small mess on the road, to calling the police if the neighbor is beating his family, etc. Throughout Eastern Europe, people are apathetic - and everybody suffers as a result.

Sometimes, it can seem a bit too much. I remember I had this impression when I first came to the US - why is everybody so concerned with things that aren't their business. In the overall picture, though, society is better for it.

So I certainly appreciate that there are people who are going to look into these things and do something about it, rather than just endlessly holding their tongue for fear of being out of line. Without it, computer chess will just be a mess.

Vas

Posted: **Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:05 am**

its a little off topic, but the so called societies that CARE started 2 world wars.
WW1 maybe killed 10.000.000 people. WW2 even more (alone 6.000.000 killed jews).

the germans often behave like policemen.
they lock e.g. their trash bins !

the monarchists and feudalistic structures in europe
began the 1st ww.

the workers had to die for it.

those structures were smashed down after ww1.
no monarchistic leaders anymore.
but the workers looked for another leader.
and elected them. this lead to ww2.

i would really not call this CARING.

i would say that the different groups mainly look how they can protect their property.
for a very long time in europe, the churches had the power to protect their property.
the kings. the lords and monarchists. the soldiers paid and ordered by the kings.
this stopped when the first countries began with democratic structures.
church and monarchy lost power.
and the wars reduced. but the fight of the classes did not stop.
and the fight about property did never stop.

i would not call it caring for others. i would call it caring for themselves.
status quo.

the brits still have monarchists. and the russians still have fascism.

the polish people are still driven by christian dictators and morals from the medieval.

some people have problems to bet set free.

Posted: **Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:21 am**

in USA those christian believing people (tea party) who call for murder,
also need to be set free.

there is no big difference between believing people in different parts of the world.

Posted: **Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:07 am**

thorstenczub wrote:in USA those christian believing people (tea party) who call for murder,
also need to be set free.

there is no big difference between believing people in different parts of the world.

Thorsten,

We're pretty lax about the Forum Rules here, but what does this have to do with computer chess? I understand your frustration with totalitarian authority in all of its present-day forms, including online chess services. And I understand that you equate anti-IPPOLIT fervor with religious fervor. But I think you've stretched the analogy about as far as it can go, and you're beginning to enter CTF territory... Just a suggestion - there have been some complaints.

Jeremy

Posted: **Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:06 pm**

i answered to a posting:

Re: A question for Harvey Williamson

Postby BB+ » Sun Dec 26, 2010 10:37 pm

there was a quote from a person called "vas".
he said:

What's the difference? A huge difference is that in Germany and USA, people essentially care. If they see something wrong, they report it and attempt to rectify it. This goes from cleaning up a small mess on the road, to calling the police if the neighbor is beating his family, etc. Throughout Eastern Europe, people are apathetic - and everybody suffers as a result.

i wanted to show, as a german, how i see the germans "care".
today USA is in the press because we all see how much they "care" there.

i have to disagree to the point of view of this "vas" person.
"care" often is just a replacement-word for or means mass murder.

what this vas means is maybe a society where the son calls the ss
when his father or mother says something against the fuehrer.
this vas person maybe wants that we have a society where private
property is more important than saving lifes.

Posted: **Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:20 pm**

e.g. in the german law, if you attack somebody,
this is not punished heavy. but if you steal somebodies
money, this is punished much heavier.

life is not important. money is.
so the people in my country behave.
the car was expensive. so they "care" for it.
but driving with the fast car through an area where many
children play on the streets, the children are not so important.

when i see people use methods of blackmailing other people,
because they believe when they hunt pirates or cloners,
they could use these methods, i wonder how a crime
can justify another crime.

if somebody demands that a handicapped operator should
carry his PC during a blitz tournament although this
person needs crutches, i cannot understand the concept of "care"
anymore.

Posted: **Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:10 am**

if somebody demands that a handicapped operator should carry his PC during a blitz tournament although this person needs crutches, i cannot understand the concept of "care" anymore.

For those of you who don't know the reference, this was in Paris 1997. See the CCC archives.

Subject: Paris Blitz tournament Thorsten "live" after round 4
From: Ingo Althofer
Message Number: 11473
Date: November 01, 1997 at 11:51:29

Peter Schreiner ( MChess Operator in main tournament ) is operating CSTal in Blitz event. He has a broken leg and is hobbling with the help of two crutches.

The idea was to let him sit all rounds at the same place. But Bruce Moreland protested; the compromise regulation then was: Peter Schreiner has to change place only if his direct opponent for the next round insists on this.

There was also a thread about why Thorsten did not operate CSTal (or CW for that matter, who was "going out"), and perhaps one involving Moreland's hemorrhoids.

Subject: Re: WMCCC next year
From: Chris Whittington
Message Number: 11803
Date: November 09, 1997 at 08:07:41

This is not true in detail, so I will give you the facts:

1. Thorsten went on strike for the Blitz, he refused to participate or operate.

2. Peter Schreiner volunteered to operate instead.

3. Peter had a broken ankle, was on crutches, and asked me to find a way for him not to have to move round between games. Also he had a special chair to sit on. there was a 'stay in place' precedent with Louwmann always sitting by the door because of air/breathing difficulties.

4. I asked van den Herik, beofre the start, if Peter could stay in one place, he needed a special chair, I had to go out, so couldn't help him move, van den Herik said ok, that was fine.

5. Bruce got to hear about this, and immediately put in an official complaint. Peter should move round like everybody else, said Bruce.

6. I accused Bruce of being churlish. Bruce said he had to move last year when he had flu and this year when he had haemoroids (which hurt, apparently).

7. van den herik ruled that Peter could stay in one place, except when the opposing operator wanted him to move.

8. Bruce appeared less angry, but still looked churlish.

9. I could no longer go out because of this, so me and Thorsten had to stay and move Peter's computer and chair and whatever. Peter hobbled around on his crutches between the rounds.

I suppose if any proof is needed that Bruce just like to oppose anything ever said, done or proposed by chris whittington or the CSTal team, this provides it.

His 'official' complaint and subsequent behaviour and attitude speak for themselves.

The worries with #3 (both the extent of the injury in this case, and of the precedent) were also thrashed about. The mis-use of accelerated pairings was the other main debate about the event.