Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic The Rybka Lounge / Computer Chess / Weekend entertainment with the IPON
1 2 3 Previous Next  
- - By Ingo (***) Date 2013-05-17 22:12
I havent tested it (I only have a little insight) but this is for your consideration:

http://www.inwoba.de

Make your guess ...

Have fun
Ingo

PS:  It is not one of the known recompiles with a different name!
PPS: New full IPON list later this weekend
Parent - - By Labyrinth (*****) Date 2013-05-17 22:25
Komodo MP running on one core?
Parent - - By šachista (*) Date 2013-05-18 10:51
My money is on Komodo 5.1 MP as well.

Two weeks ago, Don Dailey wrote:

[...]We have set the release date to May 28, 2013[...]
[...]the Komodo 5.1 MP release is currently about 30 ELO weaker than the new Komodo CCT version[...]

Komodo CCT stands at 3039 right now, with Guess having a provisional rating of 3024. Having people excited over a new 3000+ engine would be a nice PR move to introduce an engine that is on the one hand weaker than its sibling, but on the other hand offers MP functionality and promises to eventually overcome the strength of its predecessor (so to say, seeing how the codebases differ).

If it actually is Komodo 5.1 MP, i wonder whether it will replace Komodo CCT in the IPON-RRRL, seeing how its rating will probably be lower.
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 15:59 Edited 2013-05-18 16:05
I think this  is an accurate guess, and the most probable conclusion. Vas would have given some heads up for testing of a beta version of Rybka -at least that has been his history. So, I'd rule Rybka 5 out. But given the piracy issue-who knows!
Parent - - By tomgdrums (****) Date 2013-05-18 16:17
I am thinking new Shredder.  Way outside shot at a new Rybka.

Komodo MP would seem weird as I don't see Don and Larry doing it this way.  Especially if the MP beats Komodo CCT.  So that would mean customers shelled out money for CCT (me!) that is weaker then the new Komodo MP?

Plus Larry is not good at keeping quiet.  :)

I am kind of hoping it is a new Shredder.

Darkhorse candidate:  The new author (can't remember his name)  is finally releasing Rondo publicly! (the Zappa project reborn with the new name change sanctioned by Anthony)

Another reason why the darkhorse candidate might make sense?  Ingo has been making somewhat of a big deal about Zappa finally dropping out of the list.  Just a thought!
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 16:36
Hi Tom,

Wow, for Shredder to come up the ranks and gain so much elo- would be outrageous! That idea would never have occurred to me- but I suppose isn't so inconceivable Stefan is a more than capable programmer.

Re: Komodo MP. is only going out to those who already bought into Komodo 5.  You supposedly cannot buy it . Considering that CCT would end up being the next in line for MP version update (the roller coaster ride once again?).  Actually, I'm confused over what it is he is doing here! 

I would place Shredder/Rybka both outside shots for different reasons. But then you might end up being very right. Who knows?
Parent - - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-18 17:02
I am thinking Rybka is a real option.
Vas went incommunicado long time ago but Lukas said he was def working on new Rybka.
Such a jump in elo for Shredder would immediately start a new cloning discussion.
If it is Komodo it's quite silly, not a surprise at all...
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 18:23
Rybka was my first impulse. I certainly would like to see that materializes as a reality. Just considering past behaviors it would be out of character for Vas to not give a heads up that he was surfacing Rybka 5 for testing to forum members.
Parent - - By tomgdrums (****) Date 2013-05-18 19:29
What do you think of the possibility of it being Rondo finally going public?
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 19:42
Man, we are really digging now! I have NO idea! That would be way too weird! :smile:
Parent - - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-18 19:39

> .... it would be out of character for Vas to not give a heads up...


:yell:
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 19:46
Yeah! I ...I know it is laughable. But it is true. When he finally DOES have something to put out there he usually makes an announcement. "But" that is when he is ready to beta test an UCI engine.  Now, things may well have changed considerably. I'm  just not sure that they have changed enough where he wouldn't make a grand entrance and say, "I'm ready to beta test Rybka 5 ! "
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 19:49
:yell:

It is funny when you read it like that! :lol:
Parent - - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-18 20:24
But seriously, it can't be Shredder; such an elo jump would be unheard of.
Also not Komodo; Don said the 5.1 mp version would be weaker on one core than the CCT version. This engine is beating everyone except Houdini. Who else can pull this off except Vas?
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 20:31
I don't think it's Shredder either. We would have to wait and at least close to 2000 games to get a idea if it is Komodo MP.  If its Critter, Hyatt and company will be instituting an inquisition post-haste!
Parent - - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-18 20:36
It's not Critter.
Richard Vida on Talkchess:

After 985 games: Perf=3026.

Based on this preliminary rating, I would say that Ingo hacked my computer and this is a development snapshot of Critter 

*only joking*

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48035&highlight=ipon+guess
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 20:38
This is making guessing really difficult.
Parent - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-18 21:14
It starts with an R :wink:
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2013-05-18 21:30
It is difficult.

Shredder would have had to gain a huge amount, but on the other hand its been ages since v12. In that time SMK could have re-written it as a bit board engine. I wouldn't count Shredder out.

Rybka...I doubt it. But I would love it to be true. This would be the dream return.

Rondo...possible.

Thinker...? I think Nelson said a year ago there was a rumour of a strong Thinker. Then someone else made clone accusations.

Fritz/Junior/HIARCS - I doubt it. HIARCS has other projects with their GUI and Fritz & Junior are too far behind.

Komodo MP - possible, but a few days ago Don said Komodo MP was 30 elo behind. Also even if it was true surely they'd just announce that - it's not that remarkable.

Critter...maybe. Would be a shame in some ways after the incident with Houdini 3 a few months ago.
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 21:43 Edited 2013-05-18 21:45
Richards a very sharp, intelligent guy. If he did develop Critter further implementing new ideas  at this level of development -I don't think he'd have any difficulty in submitting his source code and weathering any flack that came his way in the interim. Regardless of whether this is his or not-I'd like to see him continue his work on Critter.
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2013-05-18 21:45
Yeah I agree with you. It's just that although the code would be clean the ideas would be Robert Houdart's. What I would love is a new strong, totally original engine which is...different.
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 21:48 Edited 2013-05-18 21:53
I know what you are saying. But developing upon someone else's ideas is how progress is made. I am sure Komodo is a product of a great many borrowed ideas. Robert didn't actually start off "clean".

p.s.

My intention is not to turn this thread -into the already on going controversy around Houdini/Rybka/Fruit. That is not my intention. I don't want to go there. Just thinking about the developing of ideas from what has come before. I'll stop right here.
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-18 22:04

> Richards a very sharp, intelligent guy. If he did develop Critter further implementing new ideas  at this level of development -I don't think he'd have any difficulty in submitting his source code and weathering any flack that came his way in the interim. Regardless of whether this is his or not-I'd like to see him continue his work on Critter.


Richard is a smart guy and great developer, but since Critter 1.0 (and Houdini 1.5a) he's been like a vampire on the back of the Houdini development.
He's reverse engineered Houdini 1.5 (and recently Houdini 3), and used ideas and code elements obtained through this process in consequent Critter versions (1.2, 1.4 and 1.6). As far as I can see most of the strength improvement since Critter 0.9 is achieved by profiting directly from my work.

While end users may be happy with this process, I am not (and the EU laws are on my side). Any future Critter version will be heavily scrutinized for use of ideas and code elements that come from Houdini 3.
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 22:10
I was unaware that all of Richard's work on Critter was predominantly based on Houdini. I am not being sarcastic when I say that this truly a revelation to me. If this is in fact accurate-then it makes me very sad to hear it.
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-18 22:11

> I was unaware that all of Richard's work on Critter was predominantly based on Houdini. I am not being sarcastic when I say that this truly a revelation to me. If this is in fact accurate-then it makes me very sad to hear it.


It's not "all of Richard's work", I wrote "most of the strength improvement". That is not the same.
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 22:15
The strength improvements from Critter .9 to present are what brought Critter into the fore. The focus on analysis was more of an afterthought as I recall.
Parent - - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-18 22:14
Why would end users be happy with this?
The more Critter plays like Houdini, the less relevant it becomes...
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-18 22:50
( It better not be Critter that's the mystery engine! :smile:)
Parent - By Graham Banks (*****) Date 2013-05-22 03:24

> ( It better not be Critter that's the mystery engine! :smile:)


It was Komodo CCT 64-bit using time management=3.
Parent - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2013-05-20 08:24
Probably some users would be happy because they would get an engine using very similar algorithms for free...
Parent - - By Leviathan (*) Date 2013-05-20 08:42

>Richard is a smart guy and great developer, but since Critter 1.0 (and Houdini 1.5a) he's been like a vampire on the back of the Houdini development.
>He's reverse engineered Houdini 1.5 (and recently Houdini 3), and used ideas and code elements obtained through this process in consequent Critter versions (1.2, 1.4 and >1.6). As far as I can see most of the strength improvement since Critter 0.9 is achieved by profiting directly from my work.


>While end users may be happy with this process, I am not (and the EU laws are on my side). Any future Critter version will be heavily scrutinized for use of ideas and code >elements that come from Houdini 3.


Look who is talking, the pot calling the kettle black.
Parent - - By Dr.Wael Deeb (***) Date 2013-05-20 16:23
:grin::grin::grin::grin:

:razz:
Parent - By Leviathan (*) Date 2013-05-20 21:14
:cool:
Parent - By NATIONAL12 (Gold) Date 2013-05-20 23:18
+1,:smile.
EU laws are on my side(Robert).
The thief becomes the victim,its called dog eats dog.
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-21 02:39 Edited 2013-05-21 02:44
I remember reading some questions regarding  Richard's involvement with  Houdini 1.5a. However, I was under the impression one or other programmers looked at  Critters source code. Maybe I got that wrong.  I certainly don't think his last stunt in reverse engineering Houdini 3, and developing Robodini was bright! That stunt may have cost him dearly. Personally, I would like to see him clean up his act and stop playing the trickster. 

I don't think  that put any nail in his coffin as a  chess engine programmer.

It just means if he does decide to continue he will have to do  so with a great deal more transparency. For you this has to be a welcome consideration where  EU law might require more demonstration  then you may be prepared or  willing to disclose. That might end up being a double edged sword.
Parent - - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-21 02:57
One other thing - Richard's stunt with Robodini didn't hurt you! He didn't match Houdini's strength.

Houdini still out-rocks anything out there!  Relax! :smile:
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-21 22:56 Upvotes 1

> One other thing - Richard's stunt with Robodini didn't hurt you! He didn't match Houdini's strength.
>
> Houdini still out-rocks anything out there!  Relax! :smile:


Still it is disconcerting to find improvements from Houdini 3 in Stockfish, "kindly sent by Richard Vida".

See this patch in Stockfish 3: https://github.com/mcostalba/Stockfish/commit/009a0f88e05fde5ee16d7bac429d4c62ebe6bf53

This trick is used by Houdini 3, Richard discovered it by his RE and sent it to the Stockfish team (the date perfectly matches his RE of Houdini 3 and release of the clone). "Patch kindly sent by Richard Vida." Yeah...

Another element for my "Vida" files, the list of incriminating material is getting long...
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2013-05-22 00:56
Here is my gut reaction to all this. There is an inner circle of programmers who  don't like you! You are not part of their inner circle.

They didn't appreciate your philosophy and least of all your attitude  with regard to how you handled issues revolving around the earlier development of Houdini. You just leaped ahead of all of them and questions arose that were not answered fully to their satisfaction.  For my part-this is water under the bridge. As was the entire Fruit/Rybka charade.

Now, with that said, and in the same breath-since the ICGA labeled Rybka a clone - there are those programmers who,  if allowed access to  a reverse engineered copy of a released  Rybka 5, would gladly steal every ounce of insightful ideas that  they could get out of it- without a shred of remorse, (probably some of which signed the petition against Vas). 

Obviously, Richard is NOT your friend. What he is doing is not very honorable. If someone requested his work on Houdini 3- in my mind the appropriate response would be to deny the request. And if they persisted in their request- Quite frankly, he should have told  them to do their own reverse engineering.
Parent - By oudheusa (*****) Date 2013-05-22 06:52
Richard's stock certainly went down in my book when he published the RE code.
Other than that, it seems nothing has changed in the chess programming world; every programmer builds upon the knowledge of his predecessors. But only the ones that are able to improve significantly on that come up on top.

Well of course one thing has changed and that is the hypocracy that started with the Rybka witch hunt. Most of the programmers that took part in that are no better than the rest.
Parent - - By saurus_ (**) Date 2013-05-22 07:14
Robert,

I don't want to by cynical but you started with using a lot of "ideas" from Robolito and Stockfish


Acknowledgements
An invaluable resource for any chess engine author is the excellent Chess Programming Wiki.

Without many ideas and techniques from the open source chess engines Ippolit and Stockfish, Houdini would not nearly be as strong as it is now.


And now the other developers are "borrowing" some ideas from you. I agree the way Richard discovered it was not friendly (I'm not sure about the legal aspect), but generally ideas cannot be protected for long. This is part of development. Benchmarking is common in all type of business.

By the way, to allow developers like you to work on the product I did buy H3 and I will continue to do that in future.
Parent - By siam (**) Date 2013-05-22 13:12
Your comparison sucks:

I am sure that Robert doesn't see his work Houdini 3 as a Chess Programming Wiki of an open source chess engines.

Re-engineering by Richard Vida to get ideas from it sucks too.
Parent - - By Richard Vida (**) Date 2013-05-22 22:35 Edited 2013-05-22 22:43

> Still it is disconcerting to find improvements from Houdini 3 in Stockfish, "kindly sent by Richard Vida".
>
> See this patch in Stockfish 3: https://github.com/mcostalba/Stockfish/commit/009a0f88e05fde5ee16d7bac429d4c62ebe6bf53
>
> This trick is used by Houdini 3, Richard discovered it by his RE and sent it to the Stockfish team (the date perfectly matches his RE of Houdini 3 and release of the clone). "Patch kindly sent by Richard Vida." Yeah...
>
> Another element for my "Vida" files, the list of incriminating material is getting long...


You can't be serious... You just admitted using of Stockfish GPL copyrighted code in your Houdini3. The patch you linked is only a functionally equivalent (and obvious) micro-optimization of the code that was present in SF for ages (long before the first Houdini). The question is why the exactly same method of "space evaluation" appeared in Houdini3?
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-22 23:20
Hello Richard, thank you for replying.
I just demonstrated the pattern: you RE Houdini 3, with the information obtained you improve a competing engine. You don't seem to deny this fact, and seem to find this very much OK. Yet what you do is illegal in the EU.

I hope you will give due consideration to the two messages I've published in the Talkchess and OpenChess forum. The last thing we want is to have to engage a private person like yourself in a legal procedure after the next Critter release, please don't make it necessary.

Cheers,
Robert
Parent - - By Richard Vida (**) Date 2013-05-25 09:37 Edited 2013-05-25 09:44

> I hope you will give due consideration to the two messages I've published in the Talkchess and OpenChess forum. The last thing we want is to have to engage a private person like yourself in a legal procedure after the next Critter release, please don't make it necessary.


On Openchess I did not find any recent post directed at me, and the Talkchess thread about Critter was closed due to excessive spam. If you don't mind I will reply here.

In any Critter version there will be no code to which you own the copyright. Nor any code which could have been obtained only from RE of Houdini3.

However, my impression is that you already know this, and this is not what is troubling you. Sadly, what I read between the lines is that you simply don't want to see _ANY_ Critter regardless of what code it does or does not contain.
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-25 10:35

> On Openchess I did not find any recent post directed at me, and the Talkchess thread about Critter was closed due to excessive spam. If you don't mind I will reply here.
>
> In any Critter version there will be no code to which you own the copyright. Nor any code which could have been obtained only from RE of Houdini3.
>
> However, my impression is that you already know this, and this is not what is troubling you. Sadly, what I read between the lines is that you simply don't want to see _ANY_ Critter regardless of what code it does or does not contain.


Dear Richard,

You are wrong on both accounts:
- It can rather easily be demonstrated that Critter versions 1.2/1.4 and 1.6, and OpenCritter 1.1.36 contain numerous code elements take from Houdini 1.5a. Surely you are aware of this. If ever things turn sour, evidence from the above-mentioned Critter versions will be presented to demonstrate the clear pattern of your activity, which resulted in an engine that in the similarity dendogram is indistinguishable from full Houdini clones.
- I welcome a new Critter version if it doesn't contain code elements coming from Houdini. I hope you will be able to achieve this.

In view of your denial of the past, I invite you to e-mail us your postal address at houdini@cruxis.be, so that we can send you a formal letter about this matter.
Parent - - By Richard Vida (**) Date 2013-05-25 17:36 Edited 2013-05-25 17:50
Dear Robert,

> - It can rather easily be demonstrated that Critter versions 1.2/1.4 and 1.6, and OpenCritter 1.1.36 contain numerous code elements take from Houdini 1.5a.


No. It can not be easily demonstrated, because in Critter 1.2/1.4/1.6 there is no code taken from Houdini 1.5a. At best you may talk about "ideas" (IIRC there are exactly 2 of them). Besides that, I thought we are talking about future versions of Critter and of Houdini3.

BTW - it is strange that you decided to pick on Critter and have no objections against various Strelka5 versions - which are almost 1:1 copies of Houdini at the code level.

> - I welcome a new Critter version if it doesn't contain code elements coming from Houdini. I hope you will be able to achieve this.


And I will welcome anything based on your own programming talents - which I am in no doubt you have.

Instead of badmouthing other (yet unreleased) engines you should be more concerned about legality of the code in your own Houdini. Besides of your copying of GPL-ed code from Stockfish, the legal status of Robolito (which is undeniably a precursor of your engine) is still unclear.

In any way -> If you use _any_ GPL licensed code you must release your engine under GPL compatible license... (or face the legal consequences)
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-25 18:49

> No. It can not be easily demonstrated, because in Critter 1.2/1.4/1.6 there is no code taken from Houdini 1.5a. At best you may talk about "ideas" (IIRC there are exactly 2 of them).


I look at OpenCritter 1.1.36 and can pick in less than 5 minutes at least 10 code elements from Houdini 1.5a.
I have sent Critter 1.4 to an assembly expert friend of mine, providing OpenCritter as a template, and he confirmed the existence of a significant number of violations in Critter 1.4. It is remarkable that you deny this issue, when even from a macroscopic point of view the more recent Critter engines are indistinguishable from Strelka in the similarity dendogram!

> Besides that, I thought we are talking about future versions of Critter and of Houdini3.


While our main concern currently relates to Houdini 3, any legal argument would incorporate your pattern of the last 2 years of using Houdini RE, of disclosing information about Houdini, and of your stunt of releasing a Houdini clone earlier this year at a hacker's forum.

> BTW - it is strange that you decided to pick on Critter and have no objections against various Strelka5 versions - which are almost 1:1 copies of Houdini at the code level.


We have very strong objections against Strelka 5, and we would take action against the author of Strelka 5 if he was identified and lived in a country with laws that are compatible with the EU.

> In any way -> If you use _any_ GPL licensed code you must release your engine under GPL compatible license... (or face the legal consequences)


We will be happy to reply to any legal challenge that relates to Houdini source codes (GPL or other), I don't have the slightest worry about that.
Parent - - By Stonehenge (***) Date 2013-05-28 10:56
Richard, your silence speaks volumes.
I'm sure that you now understand that we cannot be shrugged away with the half-baked arguments and lies you presented above.
I also hope that you appreciate the significant restraint we have exercised over the past 2 years with respect to your illicit actions.
It's probably best that we take any further discussion off the forum, please e-mail me at houdini@cruxis.be if you want to work on a compromise solution.

Robert
Parent - - By sockmonkey (***) Date 2013-05-28 11:08
Nothing sadder than a thief with a lawyer...
Parent - - By Ray (****) Date 2013-05-28 12:24

> Nothing sadder than a thief with a lawyer...


Well if you are in the EU, then with a statement like that you might be in the firing line as well.
Up Topic The Rybka Lounge / Computer Chess / Weekend entertainment with the IPON
1 2 3 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill