New Engine: Robodini 1.1 w32 & x64 !!!

[velmarin]

jose, not kranium, o Prima,
Prima o kranium,
Monta tanto, tanto monta, dos idiotas como idiotas dos.

From Google Translate:

Code: Select all

Monta therefore both mounted, like idiots two idiots two.

Jose, no need to get angry and call names

Apparently, you misunderstand the "l-o-l" and the "wink" emoticons used was meant as a joke about not knowing who Jose is. But I'm glad you finally understood that Kranium & Sentinel had the right to GPL/protect their work put into Robbolito 0.085g3, and that efforts/ or work put into Public Domain can also be GPL'ed to produce PB + GPL product.

If you did not understand, sorry.

But no, I do not recognize the GPL, never,

And excuse me if I did not understand.

[ThinkingALot]

I'll have to dig up the downloads of R0.085d3 and R0.085g3 and check their "readme.txt" or something listing it's improvements and additions.

Good. Just examined 0.085g3's readme: there's a nice list of changes. Now try to find one which is 1) not obvious 2) implemented in H1.03 in exactly the same way.

You do realize that even R0.085d3 was also released by Norman (Kranium)

Sure.

except that it was Public Domain while R0.085g3 was GPL'ed

The very thing I'm talking about.

Are you sure?

Well, by no one I meant no one of those who'd spent some time digging into the issue

Now if Robert Houdart used strictly Public Domain Robbolito as a base for Houdini, THEN he wouldn't encounter any legal problems

It's pretty clear from JM's post that he meant "Houdini is based on a public domain Robbo" to be a distinct possibility.

He has repeatedly denied/lied outright that Houdini does NOT contain any GPL and/or Public Domain code(s)

Think about what you've just written Every program contains public domain code.

guess WHO?....JM. See here:

And here comes a link to some idle talk about GPL with no mention of either Houdini or Robbo.

or did you conveniently leave-out this part of Julien's quote

I did a very simple thing. I opened the thread on CCC and scanned the posts searching for a suitable one. Didn't look for other JM's posts.

prefers to lie about NOT using GPL or EVEN the Public Domain codes

Do you really cry out loud every time someone lies to you? In case you haven't noticed, lying is perfectly legal

"Houdini is original"

That's actually not a lie. Just twisting the truth. Not a lie because the meaning of the word "original" is pretty vague.

As to why you defend this proven crook and a liar

You're moving offtopic involving RH's actions when they do not matter. Whatever he says doesn't affect Houdini's legality at all. And I didn't say that Houdini wasn't based on GPL Robbo. I simply pointed out the absence of proof.

[Prima]

I'll have to dig up the downloads of R0.085d3 and R0.085g3 and check their "readme.txt" or something listing it's improvements and additions.

Good. Just examined 0.085g3's readme: there's a nice list of changes. Now try to find one which is 1) not obvious 2) implemented in H1.03 in exactly the same way.

You do realize that even R0.085d3 was also released by Norman (Kranium)

Sure.

except that it was Public Domain while R0.085g3 was GPL'ed

The very thing I'm talking about.

Are you sure?

Well, by no one I meant no one of those who'd spent some time digging into the issue

Now if Robert Houdart used strictly Public Domain Robbolito as a base for Houdini, THEN he wouldn't encounter any legal problems

It's pretty clear from JM's post that he meant "Houdini is based on a public domain Robbo" to be a distinct possibility.

He has repeatedly denied/lied outright that Houdini does NOT contain any GPL and/or Public Domain code(s)

Think about what you've just written Every program contains public domain code.

guess WHO?....JM. See here:

And here comes a link to some idle talk about GPL with no mention of either Houdini or Robbo.

or did you conveniently leave-out this part of Julien's quote

I did a very simple thing. I opened the thread on CCC and scanned the posts searching for a suitable one. Didn't look for other JM's posts.

prefers to lie about NOT using GPL or EVEN the Public Domain codes

Do you really cry out loud every time someone lies to you? In case you haven't noticed, lying is perfectly legal

"Houdini is original"

That's actually not a lie. Just twisting the truth. Not a lie because the meaning of the word "original" is pretty vague.

As to why you defend this proven crook and a liar

You're moving offtopic involving RH's actions when they do not matter. Whatever he says doesn't affect Houdini's legality at all. And I didn't say that Houdini wasn't based on GPL Robbo. I simply pointed out the absence of proof.

ThinkingALot, I seriously think that even you yourself DON'T believe your argument that Houdini did not come from the GPL'ed RobboLito 0.085g3. Let's pretend Robert Houdart wrote his engine; The likelihood of one writing his/her code from scratch and it performs similarly to another engine in EVERYTHING (even including "certain bugs") is nil, although not improbable. Unless the codes are verbatim of each other - which would explain the strange "similarity phenomena" seen with Houdini 1.03 and RobboLito. You, as a programmer (of Gull etc) already know this...

[ThinkingALot]

I seriously think that even you yourself DON'T believe your argument that Houdini did not come from the GPL'ed RobboLito 0.085g3.

The following is pretty obvious: Houdini may be a derivative 1) of 0.085d3, 2) of 0.085g3, 3) of some other public domain Ippo derivative or 4) of some other GPL Robbo. And we don't know which option is true.
You are lying blatantly by saying "your argument that Houdini did not come from the GPL'ed RobboLito 0.085g3", since I didn't make such an argument and even stated explicitly in my previous post that this is not my point of view. I consider the conversation to be finished since you're obviously trolling.

[Prima]

I seriously think that even you yourself DON'T believe your argument that Houdini did not come from the GPL'ed RobboLito 0.085g3.

The following is pretty obvious: Houdini may be a derivative 1) of 0.085d3, 2) of 0.085g3, 3) of some other public domain Ippo derivative or 4) of some other GPL Robbo. And we don't know which option is true.
You are lying blatantly by saying "your argument that Houdini did not come from the GPL'ed RobboLito 0.085g3", since I didn't make such an argument and even stated explicitly in my previous post that this is not my point of view. I consider the conversation to be finished since you're obviously trolling.

I wonder if my dreamed-up idea that you DON'T believe Houdini originated from Robbolito 0.085g3 had anything to do with this statement:

:evidence presented showing Houdini to be a direct prodigy of [GPL]Robbolito 0.085g3

There's no such evidence. Can you list the differences between 0.085g3 and 0.085d3?

taken from previous threads, of course: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2248&start=30

One moment you imply there are no such evidences linking Houdini 1.03 to the GPL'ed Robbolito 0.085g3. Any one with common sense interprets your statement of "there are no evidence" as that YOU don't believe Houdini originates or is linked in anyway to said GPL engine. Next moment, you state that you have no doubt that Houdini is based on Ippolit and/or Robbolito 0.085g3. Which is it? (a rhetorical question). In fact, the underlying theme of YOUR refutation(s) AGAINST me all along or against those stating Houdini is an MP of the GPL Robbolito 0.085g3, is that Houdini is not connected to Robbolito, as there are no evidence. And that RH hasn't broken any law. You don't have to explicitly state such words but actions or opposition (discussions) to the wave speaks louder or otherwise.

I have been consistent in my stance: that Houdini IS from Robbolito (0.085g3). No flip-flops on my end. No double talk either. Or retractions. Or in-between words. Calling one a troll when in fact YOU made the aforementioned (in bold) quote, does not make it true either. So I agree, the conversation ends here.

[ThinkingALot]

Any one with common sense interprets your statement of "there are no evidence" as that YOU don't believe Houdini originates or is linked in anyway to said GPL engine.

Prima, absence of supporting evidence doesn't imply a belief to the contrary.
My statement means exactly what it means. It's an assertion of the absence of evidence. Nothing more. There's no point in inventing some hidden meaning.
Perhaps there's a misunderstanding concerning the use of "belief'/"believe". I guess unlike you I treated these words not as an admission of likelihood but as an expression of 100% certainty.

Next moment, you state that you have no doubt that Houdini is based on Ippolit and/or Robbolito 0.085g3.

Of course. There is evidence supporting "Houdini is an Ippolit derivative claim" (disassembly + the links you mentioned). There's no evidence supporting "Houdini is a Robbo 0.085g3 derivative" claim. No contradiction here.

You don't have to explicitly state such words

I see. Well, what I wrote in this thread should be read verbatim without additional meanings attached, OK? (excluding jokes & irony of course).

So I agree, the conversation ends here.

Well, I reconsidered: we may prolong it bit. Perhaps you are not a troll but just someone who really believes in hidden meanings behind everyone's words, world wide conspiracies and such

[Prima]

Update:

It appears the first spaadyshare-link for Robbodini 1.1 is no longer valid. Here's the new download link:
http://www.spaadyshare.com/P4CTHFLR4K4F/Robodini.7z

[adameve]

Richard your work is dangerously good. Keep it up