New Engine: Robodini 1.1 w32 & x64 !!!

[Alexander Schmidt]

It was the dumbest thing I've ever seen in computer chess . What kind of idiot are you?

The dumbest thing in computerchess ever was done by Chessbase: Banning Ippo-engines from their server and later sell one...

[kingliveson]

Sorry for the confusion I unwillingly created.

Please read my post on talkchess:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47045

I almost died of laughter reading Robert's response.

[Prima]

It was the dumbest thing I've ever seen in computer chess . What kind of idiot are you?

The dumbest thing in computerchess ever was done by Chessbase: Banning Ippo-engines from their server and later sell one...

@ Carlos Ylich: I understand & share your frustration that Robbodini project resulted from a bet, despite its potential to level up or surpass Houdini. I know, anger/disappointment/despair etc. gets the best of us. But I wouldn't call Richard Vida any names . He is actually honest/truthful in all his doings....

@ Alexander Schmidt: As you already know, what Chessbase did is "H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y". Not to mention going against their unfounded, pro-Rybka bias relative to the arrival of IPPOLIT back in 2010. I suppose in their case, the engine with highest ELO [irrespective of it's shady origins (as the author lies about it)], replaces ethics & morals. Gets even worse and/or funnier: those Rybka fan boys who condemned IPPOLIT - without any concrete facts as usual - are now the very ones BUYING and USING the very engine, albeit it a multi-threaded & improved version.

And so the harlotry from the Rybka fan boys wearing their short mini skirts, stiletto shoes, and crimson-painted lips - continues; pandering to the one with the highest ELO. In this case, Robert Houdart internally probed the Rybka fan boys for a total of approx. 70+ INCHES deeper (H2-H3), or in the measurements most suited to the chess community: 70+ ELO deeper (or whatever measurements one deems appropriate). Effectively de-Rybka-ing them all.

It begs the question: where are the Rybka fan boys' loyalty to their Rybka god they cherished & displayed - enough to ban "thinking" & "intelligent" folks who refused to accept the lies conjectured by them against IPPOLIT during the IPPOLIT-Rybka 3 controversy, eh?

[Prima]

Sorry for the confusion I unwillingly created.

Please read my post on talkchess:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47045

I almost died of laughter reading Robert's response.

I wasn't sure which got me laughing the most: (1) the hypocrisy by Robert Houdart, considering HE took codes and ideas from RobboLito 0.0850g3 and "FEIGNING" it to be his original code and ideas - even when caught red-handed. OR, (2) The false accusation(s) he labeled against Richard Vida.

[Jeremy Bernstein]

Let's make some generalizations here and put it this way: most of the people who read these fora (talkchess.com, rybkaforum.com and yes, open-chess.org) are the chess equivalent of, well, let's just call them "speed queens". Nothing matters but whatever happens to be the fastest and the strongest at the moment. In some cases (CC players) there's maybe a certain logic to this (although a bunch of folks all looking to Houdini for their CC analysis can't be great for diversity); but in most cases, it's simple compulsion/collector's syndrome. Just look at the transformation of the attitude toward Houdini and Ippolit on the talkchess and Rybka fora -- the once-despised "Rybka clone" code base has become acceptable since it surpassed Rybka. Or the transformation of the attitude toward Vas and Rybka since it's not on top anymore. Or the transformation of the attitude toward code copying, since it has been used to build the last 2 strongest engines (Rybka, Houdini).

Most of the real people that I encounter in the chess world use whatever engine happens to be shipped with the software they've managed to get their hands on. Most ICC members that I know use Stockfish, overwhelmingly, and have little or no idea that there are alternatives, and don't know how to get or use them. Because Stockfish comes with the ICC software. And these are smart guys, people working in the IT branch, for instance.

Most of my chess club guys use Fritz, same reason.

Anyway, don't let the speed queens get you down. The world of chess, even of computer chess, is a lot bigger than this nutty little ghetto of collectors. And speaking of collectors, my Isle of Man Lewis Chessmen stamps arrived in the mail the other day. Very nice!

jb

[Prima]

I'm least bothered by these queens, or effeminate men and their whoredom to an author who gives it to them inches (ELO) deeper than their previous well-liked author. I admit I do get a kick when their hypocrisy is laid out before them, and in their response, we hear crickets...

Anyway, the reasons being presented in Talkchess forum, in defense of Robert Houdart's right to copyright/protect Houdini, and even the reasons offered by Robert Houdart himself, are hilarious. What seems to continually escape these folks is; Robert Houdart did not use the Public Domain Robbos to commence on development of Houdini. He used a GPL'ed RobboLito. That has been demonstrably proven beyond a shadow of doubt, contrary to his originality claims.
My perspective is; RH disregarded the copyright and/or GPL version(s) of RobboLito 0.0853g, as specified by its authors (Kranium & Sentinel) when he based Houdini from it and (1) released it without source code (or closed source), and then (2) eventually commercialize it AGAINST the said GPL expression. But by the same token, he wants the public to respect his rights & his commercial Houdini, when he himself refused to comply with the owner(s) of the GPL'ed RobboLito 0.085g's expression. Seriously, how does this warped logic works in "his" world? Doesn't the EU law(s) prohibits one, within the confines of its EU borders, from profiting FROM open and/or GPL source codes - which he has [illegally] profited from?

Now Robert Houdart is at the Talkchess forum preaching [good] ethics, morals and family values to Richard Vida and the public. When that seems mute - by reason of sensible logic/arguments relative to RE-ing a closed and/or commercial code for knowledge - as presented there - he wants to shout EU laws and threats. I want to see him follow up on his "legal" threats. I want to see/read what his defense IS when details regarding the origins of Houdini & his presumptuous violation of "a" GPL'ed RobboLito (v0.085g) is presented in the court of EU law.

Presumably, either of this instance or verdict can ensue: the EU court makes Robert Houdart pay his co-Houdini authors, Kranium & Sentinel, some royalties he profited from the illegal sales of Houdini - seeing that RH violated their express GPL license and continually does so with each [commercial] release. The other alternative is prison time for RH. Or both punishment simultaneously.

If anyone is ruining computer chess, it's individuals like this Robert Houdart who, because they have something to add to an existing GPL code, have absolutely no regards for the laws, license compliance of a product, or another human's rights thereof, and attempts to justify their arrogant & illegal actions (assuming they even admit their wrong-doing) with the contribution of increased ELO. But, a wrong is still not "right". Never will be. This sounds eerily familiar...

[ThinkingALot]

What seems to continually escape these folks is; Robert Houdart did not use the Public Domain Robbos to commence on development of Houdini. He used a GPL'ed RobboLito.

1) Impossible to prove.
2) Irrelevant from the moral point of view if true. GPL Robbo is virtually identical to the public domain one, Italian to English translation and time management fix being the main differences. Starting with the public domain version instead wouldn't have costed Houdini a single ELO point.

eventually commercialize it AGAINST the said GPL expression

Zero evidence supporting this claim. There's no obvious connection between Houdini 1.03 and 2.0 besides the name itself

[Jeremy Bernstein]

What seems to continually escape these folks is; Robert Houdart did not use the Public Domain Robbos to commence on development of Houdini. He used a GPL'ed RobboLito.

1) Impossible to prove.
2) Irrelevant from the moral point of view if true. GPL Robbo is virtually identical to the public domain one, Italian to English translation and time management fix being the main differences. Starting with the public domain version instead wouldn't have costed Houdini a single ELO point.

eventually commercialize it AGAINST the said GPL expression

Zero evidence supporting this claim. There's no obvious connection between Houdini 1.03 and 2.0 besides the name itself

That's naive. And disproven by Richard Vida's recent efforts.

If Robert Houdart would simply and clearly admit that he started from Robbolito, (even) I would buy a copy. Houdini, the greatest Robbolito of all time? Sure, why not -- I'm a collector, too. But mostly out of respect for the admission: it's not easy to concede an untruth. Ed's right: it's terrible to watch Robert get dragged through the mud every time this comes up, and what he's done to transform Robbolito into Houdini is phenomenal and clearly unique -- no one else with access to the Robbo sources has even come close.

But when we use the work of others to achieve our own, we cite it, and not in a fine print, false "inspired by" note.

Jeremy

[ThinkingALot]

That's naive. And disproven by Richard Vida's recent efforts.

By "impossible to prove" I meant "impossible to prove that Houdini is based on a GPL Robbo and not on a public domain one". RV's recent RE just verified the well known fact that Houdini is an Ippolit derivative.

If Robert Houdart would simply and clearly admit that he started from Robbolito, (even) I would buy a copy

And I don't care about engine origins at all

But when we use the work of others to achieve our own, we cite it

Ippolit authors made it clear they do not care to be cited by using fake names. Do you expect RH to give credit to Yakov Petrovich Golyadkin (Dostoevsky's character)? LOL.

[Jeremy Bernstein]

That's naive. And disproven by Richard Vida's recent efforts.

By "impossible to prove" I meant "impossible to prove that Houdini is based on a GPL Robbo and not on a public domain one". RV's recent RE just verified the well known fact that Houdini is an Ippolit derivative.

OK, I see. That's probably true, since there's no obvious difference between Italian and English asm.

I recall that Norman had changed some variable typing in his versions and that these modified types appeared in the asm of Houdini, as well. I don't remember how far that had been researched, or if it was ultimately relevant.

Jeremy