Rybka Chess Community Forum
Is it appropriate to use the term "plagiarise" in connection Rybka 1.6.1 and Crafty (Closed)
|Yes, the term "plagiarise" is appropriate
|No, the term "plagiarise" is not appropriate
Wiki defines "plagiarism" so: Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as the "wrongful appropriation," "close imitation," or "purloining and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions," and the representation of them as one's own original work, but the notion remains problematic with nebulous boundaries.
The verdict from the ICGA states, amongst other things: "Vasik Rajlich is guilty of plagiarizing the program Crafty".
Bob Hyatt states: "Rybka 1.6.1 was a total copy of Crafty version 19.x, with possibly a few "mythical changes". "Mythical" because none were found, but there was so much copied code that it was deemed unnecessary to show that every line was copied. Vas claimed all versions (all has a clear meaning and he responded pretty clearly) were original. That is clearly false. This program was entered in a non-ICGA tournament that used ICGA rules, thus violating the rules for participation as well as the license agreement for Crafty. It was also given to a rating list for testing, again violating the license agreement, and most likely the rating list guidelines as well as they typically don't accept copies."
Bob Hyatt wrote: Rybka 1.6.1 it is a massive _and_ identical copy, no translation of any kind. So that one flew right back in the window and landed with a giant THUD at your feet... What to do now???"
In response, Trotsky wrote: well, remind you, yet again, for the umpteenth time, what you now call Rybka 1.6.1 was an entirely legal version of Crafty, doing all the things Hyatt wants, eg learning about chess programming and playing around and testing Crafty source code which is freely downloadable, changing it, recompiling it, testing the chessic results.
he never distributed the program to the public for money nor gave it away to the public. his mistake was to enter it in a tournament which is counter to the Hyatt license. This is not "copying" or "plagiarism", this is entering the program into a tournament in breach of the licence, some might say trivial or technical breach, but nevertheless a breach. In the tournament, btw, it played weakly and without effect.
My position remains clear. The "copying" and "use" of Crafty in Rybka 1.6.1 was entirely lawful and encouraged by Hyatt. There was a relatively trivial license breach by Vas when he entered Rybka 1.6.1 into the basement CCT tournament. It is perfectly valid to use the term "breach of license" in connection with this, but it is misleading and inappropriate to use the term "plagiarise".
So, at the base, we know, that Hyatt is no sober analyst because he exaggerates and totally cheats the content of certain facts. While the wrongdoing (following Chris W) of Vas is rather minor, no, to be exact, it might have been an oversight gesture. The participation in a lower ranked tournament where then the entity (Crafty Rybka) had only little to worse success. But the fact, that Hyatt took it for months now into his dirty propaganda, that the implementation of Crafty, when in truth was legal and according to the rules, Hyatt has ordered. Apart from that it's ridiculous, if Hyatt has no ther evidence against Vas, than having taken his first stronger steps into direction World Championship with the help of the more or less inadequate Crafty - but he could still do some pilot studies.
In truth the whole Crafty thunderstorm in a bottle shows that the whole activities against Vas for these 6 long years were nothing but motivated by personal hatred. And that by a professor with an indisputable historical fame. Perhaps it's just fears for older age too.
I suspect "thunderstorm in a bottle" is the English translation of a compound German word, if so, can you tell us what it is?
Nope. "Ein Sturm im Wasserglas" is the german equivalent of "tempest in a teapot"...
There is a German idiom "Sturm im Wasserglas" wich means "storm in a teacup" (BE) or "tempest in a teapot" (AE).
It's hard to imagine how a thunderstorm could affect the content of a bottle.
But not everthing written on a forum makes sense.
Edit: to slow...
The original is storm in a glass of water. Yes, Germans can be funny at times.
oh, I was hoping for a compound word like Gewitterflasche or Donnerundblitzenglas or whatever. The schadenfreude was too good, it entered our English vocabulary.
Rolf, just because Boehner is not at that instant looking Obama in the eye doesn't signify a negative suggestive intention. What are you doing? And what does this have to do with Vas and Hyatt? This stuff is coming out of your head. Do you understand that?
Of course it is me. But wait a minute and it all comes out. I mean, the whole case against Vas was basically founded on such superficial "reasoning". Just today on Saturday came out a whole lot of such rather primitive things tghrown into Vasik's face but if you are looking at it a bit deeper, there is nothing left. In short the picture was for me an example of an open-minded guy vs someone who must hold his eyes shut otherwise he also had to smile. But thanks for your nice ape colony from the ancient past. You avoided to call the guy right who is laughing and rolling on floor Rolf. Smaller oversight.
I am actually surprised that any discussion about Rybka 1.6.1 were admissible in the ICGA investigation.
Is the Rybka 1.6.1 that Bob Hyatt disassembled the same as the one that participated in CCT6? Did he check the CCT6 PGNs to ensure that the moves in the Rybka 1.6.1 games match the output from the binary that he has? Given that Rybka's CCT6 performance was much worse than Crafty's, this check would seem to be a minimum for due dilligence.
as far as 1.6.1 version i say its so ,, but i dont think rybka 2 on is clone of anything
Robert you knucklehead... your pic is of the Participants
page... NOT the Standings
Maybe before you go giving Harvey a hard time about a youtube tag... you should figure out the difference between "Participants" and "Standings"... as the list will change
. Clear on all that? k?
Take note - this is very important toward understand this entire affair- They got him here on a technicality. That is as plain as day. The Fruit issue may turn out to be just as much so as this.
"Rybka ...Computer Chess Tournament (CCT6) and took 53rd place out of 54 competitors" - Sorry for the confusion but it stands at 53rd place.
>Sorry for the confusion but it stands at 53rd place
Poor Robert... I see you read my post about participants and standings... however...
You need to try just one more time
e.g. just how does your "No. 51 - Jonny 2.54" with 5.5/9.0 place below
your "No. 50 - Cheetah" with a 3.5/9.0 ?
I'll give you one more nite to figure it out and come up with the right page.
Keep working on it! Never give up!
Do you believe that there never existed a RYBKA-Engine with Crafty code, of which Vas declared that it was his own work? Nothing taken from Crafty? Or only taken such parts which are offered at several other places too?
Do you believe that there never existed such a Rybka-version based on Crafty?
Think about those Versions before 1.0.
You're grasping for straws!
probably better than "gasping for air" as you are doing. Results have nothing to do with whether someone copied code or not. But don't let that stop you from continuing that train of argument...
AGAIN, GIVE IT UP, BOB!
This is bullshit and you know it.
If he had seriously copied your precise code - HE WOULD HAVE RANKED WITHIN THE TOP TEN - AND YOU KNOW IT !
Glad you continue to show how much you _don't_ know. And don't let me stop you from continuing to show it. But a small hint. An idiot can copy 9 out of 10 chapters of a good book, write the final chapter, and completely ruin the whole thing.
But don't let logic and real data deter you from your present course...
Vas ruled over computer chess for 5 years -he was no idiot - blows your cover for being the hateful, vengefully -technically skilled academician - little above average, but not very insightful computer programmer.
I know there must be some sort of deranged train of thought that such a post is supposed to create, but it is certainly beyond me. Your statement has nothing to do with the issue of copying code. One day you'll get it.
> One day you'll get it.
I think this time you are wrong, Bob.
And, the both of you should date!
My wife says I am an "eternal optimist."
She should know... so I _always_ have "hope" that some will open their eyes and become enlightened.
> My wife says I am an "eternal optimist."
Being involved with a guy like you she had most certainly better be - if she even let in one iota of pessimism there would be no reprieve!
> One day you'll get it.
This would be true with normal human beings capable of learning. The 'person of concern' is not capable of this.
Arriere, you cannot have it both ways. If Bob wasnt a supporter of a scientific hoax then he might be a good man against Vasik too. But if that is true what you seem to implicate, then you really should spend another thought on the hoax in 1997. Let me just repeat what the crime was. It was not because Kasparov was correct with his suspicion that no computer could have found Be4, which even Crafty found after 24 hours. The cheat is that by treating Kasparov like a suspicious fool and doing it in an arrogant manner, that spoiled it for a good setting of the show event. Because justified or not Kasparov was the one who should have played his best chess. Otherwise there was no valid result, because it wasnt Deep Blue as the machine that insulted Kasparov, no, but it was the scientists, Bob's friends. For all of those who cant understand my point here a hint. This is pure methodological tech. If xou want to know the strength of a certain factor you must carefully control that it's been measured because if not you measure something else, here in particular, how quick Kasparov would stepping out of the match because he had lost his motivation. Of course he didnt leave because he was happy even with the reduced prize money for his loss.
Rolf , forget DB-it is history and this is now. The only thing you are doing is- if you will! Mixing metaphors.
>deranged train of thought
This was plagiarized from Cozzie!
>> deranged train of thought
> This was plagiarized from Cozzie!
They must be engaging in sidebar conference calls!
Bob, you are an anachronism! Crafty had its day and you have played it for all it is worth. Take a therapeutic physic and stop being constipated in holding grudges against young bloods that rule over today's world of computer chess. Stop trying to be the first and last word on everything in chess engine development -at the risk of manipulating and obfuscating facts to come out on top with the answers.
Did not have a grudge against those that beat me years ago. Don't hold a grudge against any that beat me to day. Bruce Moreland and I used to spend hours on the phone, and discussed new ideas every day on ICC. I don't recall beating him in a tournament. Didn't bother me at all.
You make asinine suggestions, based on heaven-only-knows-what. And you expect anyone to take you seriously???
> delusional maximus
take off from the old road-runner cartoons. Right at the front, the road-runner would freeze, and they would display some sort of scientific name for him, like rapidimus maximus, and then along came wiley coyote, and when he froze, you would see something like "dumbicus incrediblous" or something.
Forget it Bob, it is obvious that Vas did not steal your code- if he did you would not have won the CCT6!
He might have used it for a learning base-but who would have misunderstood your lack of graciousness for rapacious vindictiveness.
Say what you want. The evidence speaks far louder, clearer, and with more authority however. Just read the crafty-rybka report. If you have any doubts after that, you are either incompetent as a programmer, or just not a programmer at all and will never understand the evidence..
What a travesty and mockery you make of justice. From what I'm gathering the ICGA report is riddled with issues.
Absolutely meaningless jive like the rest of your diatribes.
I thought it fit in rather well since it mimics your useful content as well.
So, Bob! Vas' only crime was to not inform you of his modeling some Crafty ideas and you chose to take the opportunity 7 years later to sneak up behind him and cut his throat in a coup with others to remove him as front runner! And now you try like hell to focus on? Me? A poor consumer and -non programmer who sees through your bullshit Bob ? Attack me Bob-but that will not change the fact that your hands are as dirty as hell.
I don't believe I attacked _YOU_. I pointed out that your posts have zero technical content. Just veiled or actual insults, nothing more...
They don't have to be technical to point out the truth, Bob! And if the truth is insulting to you-deal with it.
Just like the roof, everything seems to be over your head...
> Just like the roof, everything seems to be over your head...
Sorry Bob but jibs and jives don't take away the fact that you used cut throat tactics in removing Vas as a front runner. He neglected to inform you of his using some basic ideas of Crafty code that you encouraged on your web page. You are the dishonest, villain of this piece.
BOB "The Cutthroat" Hyatt. Sees his opportunity to take the Machiavellian upper hand and sneaks up behind his victim 7 years later to cut their throat. Nice guy you are!
He didn't use any "basic ideas". He copied many complete procedures, 100%.
You want to keep changing this to ideas. The topic is "copied code". Those are _not_ equivalent concepts.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill