Vas Speaks in Tongues

[hyatt]

I will ask this again.

1. He claimed that Strelka was A RE of his code. He claimed strelka code to be HIS code. Remember that?

2. He now states that if "they typed all that code by hand, it is original at the source code level."

So, which is it? His code? Their ORIGINAL code?

Can't POSSIBLY be both.

I believe he made statement 2 in self-defense. Nothing more. Saying "I typed it myself, it is original."

[marcelk]

I will ask this again.

1. He claimed that Strelka was A RE of his code. He claimed strelka code to be HIS code. Remember that?

2. He now states that if "they typed all that code by hand, it is original at the source code level."

So, which is it? His code? Their ORIGINAL code?

Can't POSSIBLY be both.

At AST/ASG level the code would be 'his', regardless of how it was fabricated.
At source code level it would be 'his' or 'theirs', depending on how it was fabricated (decompilation or retyped/transliterated).
There is no contradiction because it refers to different abstraction levels.

Compare: if I transliterate Crafty from C into PHP, the resulting work is yours at the semantic level, but mine at source code level (spacing, layout, placement of curly braces, maybe variable names and comments if I made my own).
The corresponds to '2'. The source code level is just not very interesting, but it has ownership.

If I let a C-to-PHP conversion tool do this exercise, the resulting code would probably still be yours at both levels.
This corresponds to '1'.

I believe he made statement 2 in self-defense. Nothing more. Saying "I typed it myself, it is original."

"... at the source code level". The qualifier is essential and he is clear in later posts that he considers typing not sufficient for (unqualified) originality. That should be enough. The Apostles' words get studied with less scrutiny than Vas's.

[hyatt]

Possibly because they had no motive to make vague and ambiguous statements???

[Damir Desevac]

And why should you bother, whether he copy some stuff from Fruit, you did the exact same thing as Miguel pointed out , and you refuse to admit it. At least Vas has balls to admit, whether or not he used/borrowed some ideas from open source engine, which is more that I can say about you and your fellow programmers in the ICGA panel. You are all bunch of saints, have never copied/borrowed any ideas from open source engines...

Besides, are you author of Fruit ? Let Fabien speak for himself. It is his program, not yours. You speak as if Fruit was your own creation. I want to read Monsieur Letouzey's views, not what you or anybody else think. I suppose the only purpose to get Fabien from his retirement was to convince him that Vas plagiarized his program, so that you could strip him of his titles and ban him from participating in future events. Now that you have accomplished that, there is no need for Fabien's assistance, so he might just as well go back to his cave, where he used to be...

Damir Desevec, your post is indicative of those, mostly the pro Rybkas, NOT understanding part(s) of the technical arguments or evidences. The issue of plagiarism has always been about CODE theft and/or failure to acknowledge external code copied FROM. Otherwise called CODE-plagiarism. NOT about idea-plagiarism!!!. Ideas are and have always been free for anyone to use and not have to give credit. But one MUST give credit when using another persons' codes.
In a nutshell: Vas was not banned from ICGA because he used ideas. He was banned because he copied [other] CODES and deliberately FAILED to disclosed the sources of the said codes. How many times has this simple concept been reiterated over and over???

By the way, Vas NEVER admitted, to this day, that he used CODES from Fruit. Not sure where you got the false idea Vas "had some balls to admit using Fruit codes...". In fact, he still claims Rybka is original at the source code level, despite facts proving otherwise. Then he goes on to give a warped, bogus definition of originality of source code. Additionally, the ICGA has stated, REPEATEDLY, that PSTs values ALONE is not admissible as evidence that Vas copied Fruit/Crafty Codes. However, in light of numerous evidences collected, including the 0.0 codes etc, it shows a high probability beyond doubt that the PSTs were copied as well.

Yet you want to criticize Bob and/or the technical matters that you have no conceptual understanding of.

Prima,

Vas never copied anything, it is all in your imagination, which is pretty wide I might add. Are you a clone of prof Hyatt ?? One could imagine that from the way you write... BTW: Both Chris and Ed, not to mention Alan Sessler have refuted what ever case/falsification of evidence ICGA panel had. Vas also made some pretty clear statements, and politely answered all the questions asked by both Jeremy and Zach.

[hyatt]

Chris, Ed and RF posters have refuted exactly nothing. Just a great waste of computer network bandwidth and nothing else...

[kingliveson]

Damir, the only one who can clean this crap (inside joke ) is Vas. First, he needs to release Rybka 1.0 source code, and second, answer question about releasing modified Crafty as his own program which you know by now he calls a "private matter," and refuses to address. Or perhaps, since his followers understand the tongue in which he speaks, you could translate what a "private matter" means...

[hyatt]

Damir, the only one who can clean this crap (inside joke ) is Vas. First, he needs to release Rybka 1.0 source code, and second, answer question about releasing modified Crafty as his own program which you know by now he calls a "private matter," and refuses to address. Or perhaps, since his followers understand the tongue in which he speaks, you could translate what a "private matter" means...

Simple. "Anything I don't want to talk about, or Anything where I have absolutely no leg to stand on".

[Damir Desevac]

Yes, I understand what the private matter means. If Vas tries some ideas from open source engines like Crafty, Fruit, even modify them as you say, so he can improve his own program, I don't think it is anybody's business what he does with these engines. How many people have secretly looked through Rybka code to see what make it so strong, so they could improve their own programs ? Should they now too release their source ? You can tell that to those who are making money on open source engines, like Houdini, Rick48 and countless of others and refuse to make their source publicly available after having stolen the entire open source program and got away with it...

[hyatt]

Yes, I understand what the private matter means. If Vas tries some ideas from open source engines like Crafty, Fruit, even modify them as you say, so he can improve his own program, I don't think it is anybody's business what he does with these engines. How many people have secretly looked through Rybka code to see what make it so strong, so they could improve their own programs ? Should they now too release their source ? You can tell that to those who are making money on open source engines, like Houdini, Rick48 and countless of others and refuse to make their source publicly available after having stolen the entire open source program and got away with it...

That is "life in the cheating / shortcut-taking lane". But they won't make it into an ICGA event without some scrutiny...

Houdini has been "exposed" for what it is already.

[MoldyJacket]

I would add Rybka to the list of engines making money on open-source. Yes Vas made improvements, but much of that in the beginning came from cobbling together open-source code while gathering clarification and ideas in discussions with other authors who did not know his intentions. Then he grabbed high profile tournament publicity which directly translated into a substantial revenue stream which enabled full-time work with the expensive hardware required and the addition of chess experts.

Even if Rybka currently is completely transcribed into his own code, he already made lots of money very quickly from the long hard work of others that will likely never be realized in computer chess again. Rybka sucked the sweet spot dry; Houdini or any other top engines to follow will probably never come close to raking in that kind of wealth.

If only he had been honorable from the beginning and not rushed it, he still could have made plenty of money. But apparently being perceived as a genius was worth far more by risking his reputation (and, perhaps the fear someone else might beat him to it).


This is my perception anyway.