rebel without a clue

[veritas]

Is Veritas not meaning truth ?

Absolutely correct , which is what i post , your delusional mind may have thought it made your fingers post it also but sadly the operative word here is " delusional" your attacks on one Doctor may have some veritas in them , the rest is like a religous book of fools... grains of truth on a long beach of grains of anything but veritas , your gone from inteligent debater to sycophant of a sicophant

shame really as youve embarrassed yourself more than the one you tried to show up, he has no shame anyway so what else have you achieved other than to make yourself look as another felix ,graham ,rolf , bill strong

[Adam Hair]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

[Adam Hair]

I know the rules of the game, when the tide is turning, time to attack the messenger. Nothing new under the sun.

Does this explain your approach towards Mark Watkins?

[Chris Whittington]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

I would posit that this particular "problem" is so complex, so multifaceted and even multidisciplinary that such a person is unlikely to exist. And, if he does, he is more than likely to be such a reasonable, fair, mild-mannered individual that he won't be appearing here or anywhere like it, since he will also realise that his chances of persuading the auditorium of anything more than they want to hear are about nil.

He would also be asking the "where are you going" question. You've already assumed the answer to that. Guilt or not guilt, of Vas. It is not my intention to flatter you, but you are a bright guy, and you can likely question whether the question itself is the right one. Whether there are others. Whether the question is asked within an appropriate framework. Where the line is. What are the motives of the protagonists. Cui bono. And, and, and.

And, finally, nobody in their right mind could possibly have yet arrived at a sensible final conclusion to the assumed question. Only part of the evidence has been critiqued. A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so. You may know the famous Chairman Mao quote when asked about the consequences of the French revolution, replied "it is too early to tell", well, in this case it is also "too early to tell".

[veritas]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

I would posit that this particular "problem" is so complex, so multifaceted and even multidisciplinary that such a person is unlikely to exist. And, if he does, he is more than likely to be such a reasonable, fair, mild-mannered individual that he won't be appearing here or anywhere like it, since he will also realise that his chances of persuading the auditorium of anything more than they want to hear are about nil.

He would also be asking the "where are you going" question. You've already assumed the answer to that. Guilt or not guilt, of Vas. It is not my intention to flatter you, but you are a bright guy, and you can likely question whether the question itself is the right one. Whether there are others. Whether the question is asked within an appropriate framework. Where the line is. What are the motives of the protagonists. Cui bono. And, and, and.

And, finally, nobody in their right mind could possibly have yet arrived at a sensible final conclusion to the assumed question. Only part of the evidence has been critiqued. A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so. You may know the famous Chairman Mao quote when asked about the consequences of the French revolution, replied "it is too early to tell", well, in this case it is also "too early to tell".

A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so.

THE key player is orchestrating a campaign of distraction as only a puppet master could careful you dont become entangled by your strings

NOTHING can take away simple VERITAS that leaving useless copied and pasted code as finger prints point to be found is arrogance , stupidity or incompetence , THE key player fits 2 out of 3 very comfortably
Other VERITAS is simple as Vas BROKE the rules governing entry into completions held by those who have judged him
ITS completely IRRELEVANT as to whether or not others have also done it , COMPLETELY irrelevant whether it should have been investigated 6 years ago or today
HE Broke rules and has been punished , and its COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as to who said what where or when , you and Vas can bemoan to the cows come home facts are facts , rules like laws are laws ARE rules whether we like them or not ,the difference is VAS signed up to accepting rules and reneged on his word (its his M.O. )
Like it or LUMP is Vas guilty as charged and hung rather than fined by his sheer arrogance and ignorance towards his peers (not to mention his customers )

[Chris Whittington]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

I would posit that this particular "problem" is so complex, so multifaceted and even multidisciplinary that such a person is unlikely to exist. And, if he does, he is more than likely to be such a reasonable, fair, mild-mannered individual that he won't be appearing here or anywhere like it, since he will also realise that his chances of persuading the auditorium of anything more than they want to hear are about nil.

He would also be asking the "where are you going" question. You've already assumed the answer to that. Guilt or not guilt, of Vas. It is not my intention to flatter you, but you are a bright guy, and you can likely question whether the question itself is the right one. Whether there are others. Whether the question is asked within an appropriate framework. Where the line is. What are the motives of the protagonists. Cui bono. And, and, and.

And, finally, nobody in their right mind could possibly have yet arrived at a sensible final conclusion to the assumed question. Only part of the evidence has been critiqued. A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so. You may know the famous Chairman Mao quote when asked about the consequences of the French revolution, replied "it is too early to tell", well, in this case it is also "too early to tell".

A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so.

THE key player is orchestrating a campaign of distraction as only a puppet master could careful you dont become entangled by your strings

NOTHING can take away simple VERITAS that leaving useless copied and pasted code as finger prints point to be found is arrogance , stupidity or incompetence , THE key player fits 2 out of 3 very comfortably
Other VERITAS is simple as Vas BROKE the rules governing entry into completions held by those who have judged him
ITS completely IRRELEVANT as to whether or not others have also done it , COMPLETELY irrelevant whether it should have been investigated 6 years ago or today
HE Broke rules and has been punished , and its COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as to who said what where or when , you and Vas can bemoan to the cows come home facts are facts , rules like laws are laws ARE rules whether we like them or not ,the difference is VAS signed up to accepting rules and reneged on his word (its his M.O. )
Like it or LUMP is Vas guilty as charged and hung rather than fined by his sheer arrogance and ignorance towards his peers (not to mention his customers )

do you not like him? I have no idea what to make of what you say since I never met the guy, I prefer to wait and see what people are like eye to eye first, internet evaluations are a bit like COMP_EVAL, miss things, look at the wrong things, jump to false conclusions. I doubt any of us are as bad as we think (Hyatt excepted of course).

btw, why am I demoted to "Suspicioned Capitalists (yet: no inquisitories)" over at the revolutionary forum? I fear you fall into Stalinist hands, comrade, picking off the executive committee. You be next? Or maybe you survive to almost the end, like Beria?

[veritas]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

I would posit that this particular "problem" is so complex, so multifaceted and even multidisciplinary that such a person is unlikely to exist. And, if he does, he is more than likely to be such a reasonable, fair, mild-mannered individual that he won't be appearing here or anywhere like it, since he will also realise that his chances of persuading the auditorium of anything more than they want to hear are about nil.

He would also be asking the "where are you going" question. You've already assumed the answer to that. Guilt or not guilt, of Vas. It is not my intention to flatter you, but you are a bright guy, and you can likely question whether the question itself is the right one. Whether there are others. Whether the question is asked within an appropriate framework. Where the line is. What are the motives of the protagonists. Cui bono. And, and, and.

And, finally, nobody in their right mind could possibly have yet arrived at a sensible final conclusion to the assumed question. Only part of the evidence has been critiqued. A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so. You may know the famous Chairman Mao quote when asked about the consequences of the French revolution, replied "it is too early to tell", well, in this case it is also "too early to tell".

A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so.

THE key player is orchestrating a campaign of distraction as only a puppet master could careful you dont become entangled by your strings

NOTHING can take away simple VERITAS that leaving useless copied and pasted code as finger prints point to be found is arrogance , stupidity or incompetence , THE key player fits 2 out of 3 very comfortably
Other VERITAS is simple as Vas BROKE the rules governing entry into completions held by those who have judged him
ITS completely IRRELEVANT as to whether or not others have also done it , COMPLETELY irrelevant whether it should have been investigated 6 years ago or today
HE Broke rules and has been punished , and its COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as to who said what where or when , you and Vas can bemoan to the cows come home facts are facts , rules like laws are laws ARE rules whether we like them or not ,the difference is VAS signed up to accepting rules and reneged on his word (its his M.O. )
Like it or LUMP is Vas guilty as charged and hung rather than fined by his sheer arrogance and ignorance towards his peers (not to mention his customers )

do you not like him? I have no idea what to make of what you say since I never met the guy, I prefer to wait and see what people are like eye to eye first, internet evaluations are a bit like COMP_EVAL, miss things, look at the wrong things, jump to false conclusions. I doubt any of us are as bad as we think (Hyatt excepted of course).

btw, why am I demoted to "Suspicioned Capitalists (yet: no inquisitories)" over at the revolutionary forum? I fear you fall into Stalinist hands, comrade, picking off the executive committee. You be next? Or maybe you survive to almost the end, like Beria?

The smug smirk avatar suits you

in the kingdom of the rose colored bespectacled one a one eyed one can give enlightenment or at least offer it

the question of "personal" likings or dis likings is as most of your words IRRELEVANT , but as you spew them out i shall say simple words such as IGNORANCE ARROGANCE DISDAIN towards paying customers are not qualities that endear me to him
as fir your being "Suspicioned Capitalists (yet: no inquisitories)" i think that's reasonably flattering though pretty incompetent of IPPOLIT.
As for them being REMOTELY Stalinist ....well you show your ignorance in that , a lack of Knowledge as to relitivly recent history i guess , Stalin was only generous in handing out death sentences to millions, IPPOLIT have (Like them or not ) given more to the CC community than you and the rest of this forum (including myself ) have and done so FREELY

try picking on doc Hyyat pal as you'll get further than short shrift which is what you'll get from me . i do not suffer fools (even academically superior ones ) lightly

all you and your fellow puppets are doing is dancing to Vas's tune , its worn out , it was worn out by the jumped little napoleon/stalinist/ hitler wannabees on play chess and CCC , the record cracked and broken thanks to them and intervention of IPPOLIT , Fabien BB+ etc

[hyatt]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

For a simple one, just read the "Crafty-Rybka evidence" report. There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that crafty 19.x code was copied to create Rybka 1.6.1. There is no reasonable doubt at all. In fact, once you read that there is no doubt of any kind. It is that convincing. There is other evidence, lots of it, with respect to rybka/fruit. The 0.0 constant is one that is just as damning as the edwards tablebase "fix" or the EvaluateMate() score test that does nothing in Crafty 19.x that are present in Rybka 1.6.1... So there really is a ton of evidence showing wrongdoing from the early days of the Rybka program.

The sad fact is, however, that many seem happy to just ignore that, as it was not an ICGA tournament issue. It was an issue for CCT however. It is an issue for overall honesty when the accused said the program was original and then investigation showed it had MAJOR copying from Crafty 19.x.. But apparently, somehow, that is unimportant. Even though the Feds and most state court systems have sentencing guidelines that make the sentence harsher for a second or third occurrence of a similar crime... Juries generally get to see that information and can use it in the context of "prior bad acts" to judge the current evidence and charge(s).

[Chris Whittington]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

I would posit that this particular "problem" is so complex, so multifaceted and even multidisciplinary that such a person is unlikely to exist. And, if he does, he is more than likely to be such a reasonable, fair, mild-mannered individual that he won't be appearing here or anywhere like it, since he will also realise that his chances of persuading the auditorium of anything more than they want to hear are about nil.

He would also be asking the "where are you going" question. You've already assumed the answer to that. Guilt or not guilt, of Vas. It is not my intention to flatter you, but you are a bright guy, and you can likely question whether the question itself is the right one. Whether there are others. Whether the question is asked within an appropriate framework. Where the line is. What are the motives of the protagonists. Cui bono. And, and, and.

And, finally, nobody in their right mind could possibly have yet arrived at a sensible final conclusion to the assumed question. Only part of the evidence has been critiqued. A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so. You may know the famous Chairman Mao quote when asked about the consequences of the French revolution, replied "it is too early to tell", well, in this case it is also "too early to tell".

A key player is doing everything in his power to prevent any other agenda than "guilt" from being expressed, using any and every trick in the book to do so.

THE key player is orchestrating a campaign of distraction as only a puppet master could careful you dont become entangled by your strings

NOTHING can take away simple VERITAS that leaving useless copied and pasted code as finger prints point to be found is arrogance , stupidity or incompetence , THE key player fits 2 out of 3 very comfortably
Other VERITAS is simple as Vas BROKE the rules governing entry into completions held by those who have judged him
ITS completely IRRELEVANT as to whether or not others have also done it , COMPLETELY irrelevant whether it should have been investigated 6 years ago or today
HE Broke rules and has been punished , and its COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as to who said what where or when , you and Vas can bemoan to the cows come home facts are facts , rules like laws are laws ARE rules whether we like them or not ,the difference is VAS signed up to accepting rules and reneged on his word (its his M.O. )
Like it or LUMP is Vas guilty as charged and hung rather than fined by his sheer arrogance and ignorance towards his peers (not to mention his customers )

do you not like him? I have no idea what to make of what you say since I never met the guy, I prefer to wait and see what people are like eye to eye first, internet evaluations are a bit like COMP_EVAL, miss things, look at the wrong things, jump to false conclusions. I doubt any of us are as bad as we think (Hyatt excepted of course).

btw, why am I demoted to "Suspicioned Capitalists (yet: no inquisitories)" over at the revolutionary forum? I fear you fall into Stalinist hands, comrade, picking off the executive committee. You be next? Or maybe you survive to almost the end, like Beria?

The smug smirk avatar suits you

in the kingdom of the rose colored bespectacled one a one eyed one can give enlightenment or at least offer it

the question of "personal" likings or dis likings is as most of your words IRRELEVANT , but as you spew them out i shall say simple words such as IGNORANCE ARROGANCE DISDAIN towards paying customers are not qualities that endear me to him
as fir your being "Suspicioned Capitalists (yet: no inquisitories)" i think that's reasonably flattering though pretty incompetent of IPPOLIT.
As for them being REMOTELY Stalinist ....well you show your ignorance in that , a lack of Knowledge as to relitivly recent history i guess , Stalin was only generous in handing out death sentences to millions, IPPOLIT have (Like them or not ) given more to the CC community than you and the rest of this forum (including myself ) have and done so FREELY

try picking on doc Hyyat pal as you'll get further than short shrift which is what you'll get from me . i do not suffer fools (even academically superior ones ) lightly

all you and your fellow puppets are doing is dancing to Vas's tune , its worn out , it was worn out by the jumped little napoleon/stalinist/ hitler wannabees on play chess and CCC , the record cracked and broken thanks to them and intervention of IPPOLIT , Fabien BB+ etc

thanks.

btw, I am not a Vas supporter, I am an opponent of witchhunting. I'm in favour of total developmental freedom within the law including copyright law. I believe copyright law was written for another era and other media and works badly in the case of computer games software. I believe that the advent of open source should be a good thing, but that in combination with restrictive licences and copyright law the result is some very foolish unintended consequences, of which this case is one.

[Adam Hair]

I emptied my mind (not easy) and started to read the documents again, now not hindered by the VIG prejudice but from the VII (Vas is innocent) point of view. And an amazing new world opened. Long story short and to use your own famous words, I went through the documents forwards and backwards and rejected many things.

At least you are honest about your incapacity to simply read the documents and make up your mind on that basis alone.

Jeremy

you really are a kid, aren't you? since that is potentially mean of me, I explain:

only a child, or perhaps a mathematician, believes that any human comes to a problem as a completely fair weighing machine able to view the problem in total isolation and without preconceptions.

Yet, it is possible to approach a problem without well-formed preconceptions of innocence or guilt.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is guilty", one will undoubtedly conclude that he is guilty.
If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "Vas is innocent", one will probably conclude that he is innocent. While there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of a singular piece that conclusively shows that Vas is guilty.

If one reads the evidence with the mindset of "I am uncertain if he is guilty or innocent", then the evidence can be judged properly. The conclusion reached by the reader will be based on how persuasive the evidence is. This is a reasonable and possible approach, despite actions of parties on either side of the dispute to influence the interpretation of the evidence.

For a simple one, just read the "Crafty-Rybka evidence" report. There is ABSOLUTELY no doubt that crafty 19.x code was copied to create Rybka 1.6.1. There is no reasonable doubt at all. In fact, once you read that there is no doubt of any kind. It is that convincing. There is other evidence, lots of it, with respect to rybka/fruit. The 0.0 constant is one that is just as damning as the edwards tablebase "fix" or the EvaluateMate() score test that does nothing in Crafty 19.x that are present in Rybka 1.6.1... So there really is a ton of evidence showing wrongdoing from the early days of the Rybka program.

The sad fact is, however, that many seem happy to just ignore that, as it was not an ICGA tournament issue. It was an issue for CCT however. It is an issue for overall honesty when the accused said the program was original and then investigation showed it had MAJOR copying from Crafty 19.x.. But apparently, somehow, that is unimportant. Even though the Feds and most state court systems have sentencing guidelines that make the sentence harsher for a second or third occurrence of a similar crime... Juries generally get to see that information and can use it in the context of "prior bad acts" to judge the current evidence and charge(s).

I meant to make it clear that I was talking about the Fruit/Rybka comparison, but I failed to do so. I don't think anyone doubts that early Rybka contain Crafty code.

I have forgotten about the 0.0 constant. I have to look back at the documents to refresh my memory.

I know that if you think that Vas was guilty of copying from Fruit then you will think the evidence proves he was. My point was not what you see as definite proof of guilt. And I am not questioning the quality and quantity of the evidence; there are others who are much more qualified than I am to do that. I was questioning the assumption that everyone must bring a predetermined decision of innocence or guilt when they at this evidence.

Anyway, I am trying to type this post from my phone and it is aggravating. Just ignore this post if my response does not seem clear.

Adam