Against source code

[BB+]

http://www.open-aurec.com/wbforum/viewt ... =818#p3435

From user "Naum" (so I guess it is Alex Naumov) on Dec 3 2004:

[...]

I strongly disagree with anyone publishing the source code [...]

Publishing source code totally destroys competitive side of chess programming. I HATE Crafty, and I think it's doing a big damage to this comunity. You never know who stole code from it, and how much of some engine's code is stolen from Crafty.

There are probably many not so good programmers who reach the plato in their development, and then start 'borrowing' code from the open source programs, because it's the only way for them to increase the strength of their engine.

What would be the purpose of publishing Glaurung's source. Crafty is already out there doing the damage. You think your code is easier to read. Great! It will help someone to steal it more easily.

If someone wants to check the basic idea's, there is TSCP. If someone wants to dig in deeper, there is Crafty. I don't think there is need for anything else.

But I guess, as long as Crafty is out there, there is no reason why you shouldn't publish your own code. I just don't see the big reason for it.

Alex

[kingliveson]

I like Alex, but disagree completely with his view on this matter. I dont see Crafty in no way as doing damage to computer chess. Crafty in my view is a Text Book for computer chess programming. Am not sure though if his view is a little biased because he is looking at it from commercial angle -- and even then, you can't say, lets burn that text book because someone might read it and produce something greater.

[orgfert]

http://www.open-aurec.com/wbforum/viewt ... =818#p3435

From user "Naum" (so I guess it is Alex Naumov) on Dec 3 2004:

[...]

I strongly disagree with anyone publishing the source code [...]

Publishing source code totally destroys competitive side of chess programming. I HATE Crafty, and I think it's doing a big damage to this comunity. You never know who stole code from it, and how much of some engine's code is stolen from Crafty.

There are probably many not so good programmers who reach the plato in their development, and then start 'borrowing' code from the open source programs, because it's the only way for them to increase the strength of their engine.

What would be the purpose of publishing Glaurung's source. Crafty is already out there doing the damage. You think your code is easier to read. Great! It will help someone to steal it more easily.

If someone wants to check the basic idea's, there is TSCP. If someone wants to dig in deeper, there is Crafty. I don't think there is need for anything else.

But I guess, as long as Crafty is out there, there is no reason why you shouldn't publish your own code. I just don't see the big reason for it.

Alex

Of course Naum is right. Free public education is the greatest evil of all time. How can a ruling elite keep their advantage under such conditions?

[Octopus]

Of course Naum is right. Free public education is the greatest evil of all time. How can a ruling elite keep their advantage under such conditions?

How could people claim to belong to an elite, if they are unable to publish or learn knowledge in form of readable documents, but instead see a necessity to have everything of such presented as an instantly consumable compilable source, without the need to understand anything of it?

[jury_osipov]

From user "Naum" (so I guess it is Alex Naumov) on Dec 3 2004:

I strongly disagree with anyone publishing the source code [...]
Publishing source code totally destroys competitive side of chess programming.

In translation it means: "Not prevent us from making money".

[orgfert]

Of course Naum is right. Free public education is the greatest evil of all time. How can a ruling elite keep their advantage under such conditions?

How could people claim to belong to an elite, if they are unable to publish or learn knowledge in form of readable documents, but instead see a necessity to have everything of such presented as an instantly consumable compilable source, without the need to understand anything of it?

"There are probably many not so good programmers who reach the plato in their development, and then start 'borrowing' code from the open source programs, because it's the only way for them to increase the strength of their engine."

So it is evil for mediocrities to get such free education in chess programming because naum programmer cannot compete with educated mediocrities.

[BB+]

I might point out the "open source code" seems in practise to tend to work in favour of those already commercialised in the field, perhaps even increasing the barrier to entry for an outsider [the logic here might be: after all, if almost anyone can produce a 3000+ ELO engine, playing strength is diminished as a selling point]. There's been almost no turn-over in the commercial entities in the aficionado market in the last decade. Ten years ago there were Shredder, Hiarcs, Fritz, and Junior. Today we have the same - Shredder, Hiarcs, Fritz and Junior. Customer loyalty (some of it earned) thus looks to be an important consideration in the long-term. As for others, Rebel and Chess Tiger are gone, and Rybka has appeared. Letouzey, Naumov, and Cozzie among others (Gandalf, Goliath and more) had partial goes at it, but only Rajlich was able to establish himself [and I'm not quite sure if any of the three named really wanted to do CC fulltime]. And that only after he bucked the ChessBase trend for a few years via the emerging Convekta. As VR himself put it:

Subject: Re: Rybka 1.0 Announcement
From: Vasik Rajlich
Message Number: 466936
Date: December 05, 2005 at 10:59:16
[responding to Uri Blass]
[...]
Basically, right now, computer chess sales are in the hands of a certain company. I want to get a bigger chess crowd thinking differently - not just Rybka, but also Fruit, Shredder, Zappa, .. maybe Movei . Then we can really have some fun.

[SPAMMER]

There are two aspects to this issue; Programming and algorithm development. To have a top original engine, you need to be a master of both domains.

The availability of strong, cleanly written, open source engines allows folks who have good algorithmic skills to compete at the top levels of engine chess, even if they are lacking in programming skills. This may mean using 99% of an existing engine while changing certain algorithms that can significantly alter engine play (think Toga). Of course this is fine if both the original and the derivative are handled under GPL and much more problematic when the source is reverse engineered commercial software.

So it's easy to see why some of the crackerjack software developers aren't happy with the current trend (especially if they have a commercial interest in selling engines), but for those that are more interested in the algorithmic aspects, this is the golden age. It all depends on your perspective...