Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Sorry i am for new softwares
- - By mrolin (*) Date 2009-10-25 02:38
What is a clone?
A copy of parts of another software?
A copy of parts of another software?
A copy of some ideas even with some reverse engenering.
I d'ont care.
The best is the best.
Proove it, and all will be down.
If someone can issued an engine stronger than Rykba,  it's only an engine.
It's an old problem, when and who invented this.
I am a poor english worker, from france.
I  think only that all this comments are moral ones.
The réality is : which engine is number one.
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2009-10-25 03:13
The clear definition of clone is an engine that claims to be something while being something else (usually with hex editing.) In this case it's different since Rybka was reverse engineered to get code, some parts were changed from the code, and the name was changed.
Parent - - By Permanent Brain (*****) Date 2009-10-25 04:28
Did anyone look at the latest version? In CCC, doubt was raised if - this particular version at least - can be a result of reverse engineering directly. Someone said it rather looks like "normal" code. Surprisingly, it uses italian words for procedures (or what's that called?) and variables, and so. else pointed out that these contain spelling and translation errors.

As for clones, the term is used with different meanings. From my viewpoint, e.g. "copy & paste clones" are a clear copyright breach except permission is given, like in open source where it's permitted under certain rules, but of course usually not with commercial software. But on the other end of the spectrum, e.g. breakout games are often called "breakout clone" but just because they are based on the same game idea, or concept. But that's perfectly legal if they wrote their own code. So there is "clone talk" ranging from software theft to just using same ideas... and in between is a large grey zone.

As for Rybka clones, there are always people pretending that something is like this or that, or that it is not, although they know absolutely nothing and probably also don't understand much. It's always the same circus. You'd need a kind of microscope, or relevance scanner to tell the 0.1% reasonable statements from all the bullshit noise. That can include so called experts who aren't always right either (as a previous clone case has shown).
Parent - - By morphyzen (**) Date 2009-10-26 19:14
This "clone" is not so good after all.  It lost to Rybka in a 10 game 12s/move match. And i tried it with the latest version of this "thing".
Am i allowed to post the games here.?
Parent - - By Vempele (Silver) Date 2009-10-26 19:18

> This "clone" is not so good after all.  It lost to Rybka in a 10 game 12s/move match.


Not statistically significant.

> Am i allowed to post the games here.?


As long as you censor the clone's name.
Parent - By morphyzen (**) Date 2009-10-26 19:36 Edited 2009-10-26 19:38
I posted it on computer chess. How much games have been run that has given the result the other way?
Parent - By InspectorGadget (*****) Date 2009-10-26 20:47

> This "clone" is not so good after all.


That thing is very strong. At some stage I tested it without a book and Stockfish, Cyclone Rage, Rybka 232a SP, Bright and Thinker Inert 54D were playing with a Perfect 12 book. It was a 10 minute tournament and the MP engines were playing on 4 cores, it puts them nicely on a whipping post.
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Sorry i am for new softwares

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill