ChessBase: A Gross Miscarriage of Justice in Computer Chess

[Harvey Williamson]

I wouldn't like to meet bob in person though

Just shows what a jerk you are. I am in the relatively unique position of having met most of the current players in Computer Chess. In the Pub I have got on with all of them. I think idiots like you should actually visit a Computer Chess event and see how well everybody gets on.

I don't think that is fair or appropriate as things can go downhill from here once we get into the back and forth of name calling. Let's all try to be nice.

personally i would love to meet Bob, as would any true fan of computer chess.

[kingliveson]

There's more breaking news to discuss: http://www.top-5000.nl/resignation.htm

Email to ICGA chairman David Levy



Date : January 5, 2012

Subject : Resignation

CC : Mark Lefler



Dear David,

After seeing the reactions of my former colleagues on the ChessBase article it's now crystal clear to me nothing is going to change.

As I see it the real power is in the hands of the programmers, when they go on strike there is no tournament, the CSVN felt the power of the programmers a couple of months ago, they destroyed two tournaments.

And unfortunately I can not say you are blameless in the latter. You attacked the CSVN in a total unnecessary way in your notorious Attack of the Clones article on ChessVibes later echoed back in the programmers letter to the CSVN. Your motives for that are a mystery to me.

Looking back at the last 6 months and all the bad things that happened I do not want to be associated any longer with the ICGA in any way. Please be so kind to remove all my tournament results including my 2 world titles.

Please inform me where to send the Shannon trophy, it's not longer welcome in my house.

Regards,

Ed Schroder

Perhaps Ed has seen Rybka's source code...

[Harvey Williamson]

There's more breaking news to discuss:

Email to ICGA chairman David Levy



Date : January 5, 2012

Subject : Resignation

CC : Mark Lefler



Dear David,

After seeing the reactions of my former colleagues on the ChessBase article it's now crystal clear to me nothing is going to change.

As I see it the real power is in the hands of the programmers, when they go on strike there is no tournament, the CSVN felt the power of the programmers a couple of months ago, they destroyed two tournaments.

And unfortunately I can not say you are blameless in the latter. You attacked the CSVN in a total unnecessary way in your notorious Attack of the Clones article on ChessVibes later echoed back in the programmers letter to the CSVN. Your motives for that are a mystery to me.

Looking back at the last 6 months and all the bad things that happened I do not want to be associated any longer with the ICGA in any way. Please be so kind to remove all my tournament results including my 2 world titles.

Please inform me where to send the Shannon trophy, it's not longer welcome in my house.

Regards,

Ed Schroder

http://www.top-5000.nl/resignation.htm

Children throw tantrums all the time.

[Rebel]

I am very disappointed in your website. The PST page pretends to address the PST issue, addresses, instead, a completely different issue -- one that isn't claimed by the investigators. Your insistence on this point, despite the fact that you are aware of the difference between what is claimed (A) and what you refute (B), indicates a willingness to distort and manipulate the available data in order to achieve your desired results, rather than seriously evaluating the evidence on its own merits.

1. When the accusation is that Vas copied the Fruit eval and I am able to list 10+ differences then I think I do have a point.

2. When the accusation is that Rybka started its life as Fruit and I am able to list 20 (small to huge) differences then I think I do have a point.

3. When you are on top with 150 elo then you are original.

4. When you further add 250 elo then you are unique.

[Rebel]

the main accusers Mark and Zach are not willing to give in that their PST theory is based on VIG and are not able to admit a mistake.

I re-re-re-re-re-iterate my challenge. Derive the PST of non-Fruit program with as few code changes from Fruit 2.1 as Rybka 1.0 Beta requires. Then I will give in.

I might do that some day when things become more relaxed. For the moment I refer to the work of Miguel, as he has proven you can't make a case building assumption on assumption.

Furthermore, I find your assertion that the theory is based on my (and Zach's) preconceived bias of VIG (Vas is Guilty) to be a defamatory slur. I have in no way ever assumed Vas is guilty in the sense you imply. Your continued insistence that I possess such bias is opprobrious.

I can understand you feel this way but it's how human mind works as defined by Bertrand Russel. In no way I have accused you of dishonesty. It's a complicated case, that opinions vary is no surprise.

[hyatt]

So YOU want to perpetrate that lie as well? NO big surprise there, I don't suppose.

Then how you call this?



In another post in Rybka Forum, you accepted that you posted that message, "if I were you I'd do X" isn't open to interpretation, you are giving advice to another person to do X.

As I said. kids use that expression all the time... To express disdain for the "target".

For example, "I'd rather be dead than red in the head" an insult levelled at red-heads. Do you REALLY think they are suggesting that all red-headed people commit suicide? Or are they just doing as I did and implying "I REALLY would not want to be you?"

Grow up. That is NOT giving advice. I'm pretty direct. If I meant to give advice, I would say something like "why don't you jump in front of a moving train" or something similar.

This is YOUR MAJOR PROBLEM. You latched on to that "exact" word in Zach's report, and want to claim it means the PST values between Fruit and Rybka match EXACTLY. That is NOT what the report says. Nor do you find the words "I suggest you ..." in my simple statement.

Again. Grow up.

[hyatt]

if the general public is not allowed to view these posts then they are of no value to me

Not that I'm trying to defend concealed subforums or anything but if the general public won't register in the forums to read such threads, then they don't care enough.

Today's just our day to disagree, I guess. This is like saying: That the Chinese don't acquire forbidden literature in large numbers demonstrates their lack of interest in that body of work. If you can't see the information, you don't know that there's a reason to join the club to gain access to it. These issues are _the_ issues of the computer chess community at the moment, _not_ which engine has a temporary 30 Elo advantage +- 15 Elo. That Rybkaforum hides them makes commercial sense, but is unfortunate. That Talkchess hides them doesn't make any sense, except to either assuage their corporate sponsors, or to give the impression that it's a civil environment, where hillbillies from around the world can join together to discuss hot topics in computer chess, such as white power and the international conspiracy of world jewry. Oh wait, that forum's hidden, too...

Seriously, though, thanks for noticing that OpenChess does it differently. The mods here deserve everyone's (but most especially my) gratitude and respect for their hard work of doing nearly nothing. Restraint requires patience, intelligence and good judgement, and I continue to be pleased and impressed by the restraint demonstrated here on a nearly-daily basis.

I am a very active member of CCC, but what Bob Hyatt and the other moderators have done on CCC to hide this issue is shameful. And I am a member that still agrees that ICGA made the correct call. For them to say this issue has already been talked about, and that it is not topical for the general forum. When this issue is front page on a major chess site is a obvious crock. The member at CCC are again trying to post on this subject in the general forum. I will not waste my time there any longer to have the post moved and/or deleted because CCC members dare post about this subject.

Thank again for Open Chess.

"Bob Hyatt" did NOTHING to "hide the issues". The "engine origins" forum was started by the PREVIOUS moderators, against my advice (and the advice of others). They did this EXPLICITLY to hide the discussion from public eyes, no doubt about it. But it is the way things are and we've had no success in undoing it. Do NOT blame that on me, as I had no part in it and opposed it from the beginning...

[hyatt]

the main accusers Mark and Zach are not willing to give in that their PST theory is based on VIG and are not able to admit a mistake.

I re-re-re-re-re-iterate my challenge. Derive the PST of non-Fruit program with as few code changes from Fruit 2.1 as Rybka 1.0 Beta requires. Then I will give in.

Furthermore, I find your assertion that the theory is based on my (and Zach's) preconceived bias of VIG (Vas is Guilty) to be a defamatory slur. I have in no way ever assumed Vas is guilty in the sense you imply. Your continued insistence that I possess such bias is opprobrious.

I would strongly suggest that you constrain your vocabulary a bit. Ed can't deal with "exact". He CERTAINLY will not be able to deal with opprobrious. Maybe try "shameful" although even that one still has TWO syllables...

[hyatt]

My previous post wasnt logged but oh well.

The crux of my question is that if the ICGA group was trying to determine the truth about a particular subject why were members of the committee/panel/board that had already made their feelings and decisions clear allowed to participate and vote on a decision? It seems to me that the panel was already loaded members who felt that Vaz was guilty verdict from the start.

I am making an assumption that because several of the key accusers are well educated they are familiar with at least the basic outline of how boards and meetings should be run. Considering the political, financial and professional issues involved in a case such as this where a World Champion was to be ousted from "its" throne, I think the public expects at least some degree of professionalism during these proceedings.

It seems to me that basic ethical conduct at such meetings where particular persons have a clear, preconceived belief or vested interested (EMOTIONAL OR FINANCIAL) in the outcome should not participate. I listed in my previous post several names that entered the situation with Vaz's guilt already a forgone conclusion and the proceedings were just a "formality"
Bluntly, Why did the key accusing members not recuse themselves from the preceedings?
Why not just present the information and their findings and leave the room to let the panel make its own decisions?

some other minor questions in reading the posts.
Is code copying from Crafty an issue? my reading so far has said that early versions of rybka were clearly direct crafty but i see nothing indicating that in versions in question.

What version(s) of Rybka participated in the ICGA events that have led to this ban?

A lot of focus has been on the semantics:
define what the ICGA used as the definition of Code copying


Define plagerism in the context of programming?
(my sense is this is where there are two schools of thought on this and the major clash occurring over what this means and where the line is.)

The definition of that in the academic sense is very broad and applies better to papers and other articles..the word plagerize is used on the ICGA website as the reason for Rybka's ban so this is a central point.

1. The PANEL produced the report and evidence.

2. The ICGA board, which is completely disjoint from the panel rendered the final verdict AND determined the punishment.

3. Vas had a chance to participate in the panel, and he had a chance to participate directly with the ICGA board after the panel report was completed and he had received a copy. He chose to exercise his right to remain silent.

I don't see how one can misconstrue the meaning of "code copying." Quite simply, "to copy code someone else wrote". Plagiarism is a bit broader, but in the case of computer software, it would be "copying someone else's code and then claiming that you wrote it yourself."

Easiest example to understand is the Rybka 1.6.1 / Crafty 19.x copying that was blatant and massive in its scope...

Finally, the people best qualified to examine Crafty/Rybka/Fruit and determine if code had been copied WAS/IS chess programmers. They can do this in 1/100th the time a non-chess person would require, because they are familiar with the underlying data structures, program functions, and chess algorithms. The original letter of protest was signed by 16 programmers. You could hardly exclude them from the proceedings as they had been the ones that discovered the evidence. The panel did NOT convict Vas. The panel presented evidence to the ICGA board. They formed an opinion, and rendered a verdict based on the preponderance of the evidence presented and the absolute refusal of Vas to supply anything in opposition.

[hyatt]

So no dishonesty on Zach's part,

Don't imply I ever called Zach dishonest you bully, I never did.

Instead look in the mirror, you, Robert Hyatt, wishing Jeroen Noomen dead.

EDIT, just see Uly beat me to it.

So your web page is not harping on the word "EXACT" with regard to the PSTs? Who, EXACTLY, wrote that report on the PSTs? The report you are saying is intentionally distorting... I will point out AGAIN. I have REPEATEDLY said that the fruit pst code, modified by the constant changes Zach proposed, produces the Rybka PST values EXACTLY. You, in your usual dishonest way, claim that both I, Zach and Mark state that the fruit/Rybka PST values match EXACTLY. And you go to great lengths to show them. KNOWING that is not what the report says. I quoted the relevant section of the report stating EXACTLY what I said it said. So, you are dishonest. And you claim that Mark/Zach/I are the ones that are making false statements.

Your words will continue to haunt you when you try to publish outright lies. Want to turn over this can of worms again? My statements about "EXACT" are QUITE CLEAR and have NEVER included the phrase "Rybka PST values match Fruit PST values exactly." My statements have ALWAYS said, the fruit pst code will produce Rybka PST values EXACTLY, if you make the changes Zach shows. If you change the constants, it makes your statement look even more idiotic, because how could the values match if the constants change??? jeez

"What a wicked web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

You should remember that...