So as it seems Vas took the Fruit 2.1 source code and started the big obfuscation process to hide its origin (mail-board to bit-board, manipulating the visual aspects: depth & nodes) then claiming the works of someone else as his own. It's like translating a best-seller from English into Chinese, make some changes, add a few characters yourself and sell it under your own name.
And now for the bizarre (part-1), huge progress was made and several hundred elo points were added to the Fruit-clone which is so bewildering it only leads to one conclusion: Vas did not need that Fruit 2.1 origin at all.
Bizarre event number 2, the hacker being hacked. Strelka. Also for this guy the same counts, if you are able to re-engineer a cryptic executable into full meaningful source code that is a genius who easily could have written an original engine himself.
Bizarre event number-3, Vas calling Strelka as his own. Which became the beginning of his downfall because a couple of smart people noticed the big similarities between the Strelka and Fruit source code. The ball got rolling. Vas in the meantime kept improving Rykba to new incredible heights.
Bizarre event number-4, The Ippo's, Fire's etc. This time with perfect readable source and as freeware, no limitations and no author. Probably being a total rewrite of Strelka or a new Rybka re-engineering, probably a mix as the Ippo source code looks pretty clean.
Anyway, anno 2011 you can download these sources, make some changes and have your own 3000+ elo chess program in 1 hour. That's bizarre, ugly and beautiful at the same time. It's called progress.
As for the The ICGA Process, a couple of points, the verdict is good, canceling of the WC titles, a strong message to aspirant programmers who want to compete in ICGA tournaments and deliberately want to humbug the rules of fair competition.
As for the criticism,
1. The life-time ban is way out of control. Not even in professional cycling with all its doping scandals life-time bans are practiced. When a cyclists is caught part of the punishment is the public humiliation via the media. That is taken into account.
2. Related to (1), the active role of the ICGA pushing the story into the mainstream media is disgusting and totally self-serving. There is absolutely no need for that. The programmer community got the message already.
3. The ban of Chris W. from the panel. If there was one active voice speaking in defence for Vas it was Chris W. Chris subscribed but had to undergo a mortifying and humiliating process of identification. When Chris after having showed a lot of patience finally responded in his usual charming way they complained he was being rude and was not allowed to enter. Anyone with a reasonable knowledge of the past knows about the arduous relationship between the 2. The ICGA was looking for a reason and Chris gave them eventually. As a result of this scandalous intentional provocation I gave the IGCA the middle finger as well and asked them to remove my subscription. The real bad news is that Vas has been denied the only voice who would have spoken in his defence.
Thanks for listening.
~Ed Schröder, Dutch computer chess programmer of Rebel/Pro Deo.
> I gave the IGCA the middle finger
My hero, Ed Shroeder.
By the way, Pro Deo, what a great chess engine!!
> As for the The ICGA Process, a couple of points, the verdict is good, canceling of the WC titles, a strong message to aspirant programmers who want to compete in ICGA tournaments and deliberately want to humbug the rules of fair competition
My hero, Ed Schröder.
For the record, also, it took the ICGA weeks to decide on the punishment. In private emails between David and the secretariat, he told us that they quickly agreed on guilt after carefully reading the report. But the discussion about punishment dragged on and on. As it should have. I didn't expect a life-time ban, but I had assumed that any ban would, by default, be lifetime anyway, for the reasons I gave above. Requesting the trophies back is reasonable. Getting the prize money back will likely take court action, which I don't think would be worth it due to the relatively small prize amounts compared to the expense of lawyers and filing fees, and then collection costs and fees.
It would have been so much better if the entire thing had not happened, obviously.
I don't think one can make a valid case for breaking rules, and then providing some benefit that should somehow mitigate the rule-breaking. Robin Hood makes for a good story or TV series, but he was still a criminal. There is no doubt that whatever ideas Vas discovered would have been discovered by others, if some of them had not already been found. There are a _lot_ of bright people involved in computer chess today, new as well as experienced ones.
The idea of "your code must be your original work" seems pretty clear to me. But, apparently, not to everyone, as the current fiasco clearly shows. One of the things we are required to teach in computer science (an accreditation requirement based on the ACM CS curriculum) is computer ethics. Where we discuss these sorts of issues at length so that students learn early on what is acceptable and what is not, even if it appears to be within existing rules/laws.
Common sense works pretty well, assuming one listens to it.
> As I have said elsewhere, IMHO a 1 year ban and a lifetime ban are the same thing in this case.
A one, two or three years is not the same as a lifetime ban. Bob, public exposure -media blitz -people are more forgiving then you are want to believe. As for facing peers -in this case I would think both sides have some shame to live down and besides time heals all ills. My God! You even give more to Norman by way of ingress to Talkchess. But for one of your own you only can scream "off with his head?"
I'd be willing to bet that for most, 1 year would be permanent. Perhaps not for "all", but certainly for "most".
I certainly don't see any "shame" to live down on the part of the ICGA or the panel investigation, so I won't try to guess what you mean there.
But I would expect that an appeal of that life-time ban would at least be listened to. I doubt it would have happened had Vas responded to the _many_ requests for participation, statements, _anything_ at all. Failing to offer any sort of defense is certainly living on the dangerous side of things.
Stopping cheating certainly falls into that category. When killers receive the death sentence, it is widely publicized, because that adds to the deterrent factor, which is one of the points of the death penalty. Obviously you rid the world of dangerous and pathological people, but you also let the rest of the world know that "we have room for you, too, if you want to follow this kind of path."
> Stopping cheating certainly falls into that category. When killers receive the death sentence, it is widely publicized, because that adds to the deterrent factor, which is one of the points of the death penalty. Obviously you rid the world of dangerous and pathological people, but you also let the rest of the world know that "we have room for you, too, if you want to follow this kind of path."
I'm sure you chose your words very carefully. Do you think that your continually juxtaposing Vas in the same context and frame work as people who are killers and who are pathological-this seems to be an on going calculated effort to instill a very disturbing picture of this man beyond anything he has done- especially when you include words like death penalty. I'm beginning to wonder just how deep your hatred for this man goes. It is very disturbing. I wonder if even you are aware just how deep that hatred goes?
Take it as a simple example, and don't try to read more into it than is there...
I doubt I could provide _any_ analogy that someone would not find fault with on some level.
You are forming your opinion second-handed since I do not believe you have a background that covers computer chess programming, C/C++ programming and assembly language for the X86 architecture. I have all of those, so my opinion is formed by direct observation, not by emotions and listening to what _others_ have to say. Big difference.
You are certainly going out of your way to defame this mans character by association to criminal action he never did- you might end up in the end liable for going out of your way to destroy his life. In short, you are out of control.
As I said, someone complained about the ICGA notifying the press. I pointed out that it is not at all unusual for such notifications, particularly when the news of the investigation has already been mentioned by several media sources... If you want to make it into more than it was intended to be, feel free. I think the context is pretty easy to understand unless one has an agenda to do otherwise...
> You make it a habit to use words like "Murder" when regarding Vas' case - you did it on Openchess, you do it here and on Talkchess- and like I said one of the posters there censured you for it. You are going way out of you way to make sure you completely destroy this man with a rapacious viciousness that goes beyond anything I've seen in my life time. You don't seem to be able to stop!
Even I though I largely agree with the ICGA verdict (penalty is a bit harsh though), I do agree that the various analogies to murder, murdering despots and other violent entities and crimes is a bit much. Bob is not the only one doing it. People on both sides have ratcheted up the analogies to violence. (and overall heat of their posts!)
And yet you are harping on the process. How about harping on the evidence? The best example for me is Rybka 1.6.1 / Crafty 19.0. Pick any part of that you care to and explain to me why the evidence is no good. Why did I pick that one? Crafty is my program. I wrote every line of the code he copied, I know what it does, why it was written that way, why some of the "bugs" he copied were unintentionally left in, why those bugs were there in the first place, and what they originally did that was important, but which Vas would have no way of knowing at all because by the time he started, the "issue" with endgame databases was long since solved.
Pick away at any of that. Or we can step to the Rybka 1.0 beta, the second clear example of his copying code. there are examples of code copied outright and not changed, because the bitboard issue doesn't affect all of an engine. Not the way time is allocated. Not an unusual bug using floating point where it makes no sense. Not the search structure which is so incredibly different from the search in his previous program (rybka 1.6.1) yet is identical in major chunks with the code in Fruit 2.1...
there is too much evidence. The old "where there is smoke, there is fire" is not quite appropriate. This looks more like the smoke and fire at a space shuttle launch..
And yes, I can not imagine anyone disagreeing, IF and ONLY IF, they have actually read the report and understood it. If that is not the case, and that certainly is true for some here, then I suppose they can hang on to their belief in innocence for as long as they can avoid facing up to the report...
Sort of an ostrich-like approach. Bury head in sand so that you don't see the evidence, and shout yada yada yada over and over so that you can't hear the evidence. SO that then the evidence doesn't exist at all. In some twisted sort of way...
You seem to have a REALLY hard time remembering that you are not a judge or sitting on a jury in this matter, and can't convict anybody of any crimes. It's just not in your domain.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the problem occurs when you send out a press release calling someone a cheat. I'm rather amazed that you think you can get away with that kind of behavior.
We could continue, maybe Pete Rose? Mike Tyson? Not much point in continuing, since the point is pretty obvious, don't you think???
My point, to get back on the subject, is that many people have publicly denounced Armstrong for cheating (remember, he has never tested positive) and yet no lawsuit from Armstrong for defamation. I think those of you that are arguing that Vas has grounds for a lawsuit don't know IMHO what you are talking about. Vas has yet to make a statement on this matter and you all are jumping the gun and assuming that, despite his silence, he will take the ICGA to court??? Let's here Vas speak!
Have we considered that perhaps what has kept Vas from speaking and going to court is what has kept Armsttong from doing the same. IMHO, they both have more to lose if it goes to court.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill