OpenChess

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.

[Quote]
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.[quote]

more details / information please ?

Rebel wrote: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.

I agree that this entire story meets minimum standards of "crazy". I'm a bit shocked that Chris was denied access to the panel, didn't know that.

I disagree with the above point, though. The "World Computer Chess Champion" title is used publicly, is attached to advertising and other marketing materials and isn't a programmer-specific designation. In the same way that cheating at the Chess Olympiad isn't a private olympiad-chess-player matter. The ICGA is certainly within its rights and scope of activity to announce that the World Computer Chess Champion broke the rules and has had his championship status revoked. The fact that they published the evidence is extraordinary, in fact -- most organizations would have kept that private and just said "it is what it is". I appreciate that any programming-literate individual can read the documents and understand the conclusions drawn.

Anyhow, plenty of room for disagreement. Nice to see you posting again.

EDIT: another way of thinking about this is -- by participating in the WCCC, Vas "won" the marketing title of "World Computer Chess Champion", a title administered by the ICGA. By determining that the entry was fraudulent, the ICGA must necessarily revoke that title, and the only means of doing so is via a public announcement.

jb

Thank you Ed for voicing this strongly different opinion.
Respect!
And +1 finger to the ICGA.

oudheusa wrote:Thank you Ed for voicing this strongly different opinion.
Respect!
And +1 finger to the ICGA.

You really need to work on your reading comprehension, oudheusa:

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.

But Ed is also against the life-time ban.

Uly wrote:But Ed is also against the life-time ban.

Sure, reasonable people can disagree on the severity of the punishment. I was also surprised by the decision. On the other hand, I think that, given the weight of the evidence and the complete lack of cooperation on the part of Vasik Rajlich, handing down the most severe punishment available was justified, even if I personally would have voted for something less.

Ed doesn't appear to disagree with the interpretation of the evidence, though.

Jeremy

Jeremy Bernstein wrote: You really need to work on your reading comprehension, oudheusa:

Perhaps you should take some of your own medicine Jeremy.
I have never taken position on the verdict. I have called the ICGA a bunch of amateurs, which some took as offense, for their lack of due legal process and their disproportionate 'sentence', while for Rybka 3 and 4 nothing was proven.

Rebel wrote:.
.
.
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.
.
.
.
Thanks for listening.

I totally agree. A life-time ban seems excessive.

oudheusa wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote: You really need to work on your reading comprehension, oudheusa:

Perhaps you should take some of your own medicine Jeremy.
I have never taken position on the verdict. I have called the ICGA a bunch of amateurs, which some took as offense, for their lack of due legal process and their disproportionate 'sentence', while for Rybka 3 and 4 nothing was proven.

One does not use a legal process for a private organization's rule enforcement. I have already cited NASCAR, PGA, NBA, NFL, you-name-it.

We investigated the versions that competed in ICGA tournaments. Once it was shown that Rybka 1.6.1 (pre-beta) to Rybka 1.0 beta thru 2.3.2 broke ICGA rules, why is it necessary to examine later ones. The punishment was for those versions that played in ICGA tournaments.

The amateurish component here is from posts such as yours that complain about vague issues (lack of due legal process). That may yet come into play if the FSF decides to pursue this further, as "due legal process" comes into play when the issues are legal, such as copyright violations or GPL violations. Then you can talk about "due process" all you want.

However, as to JB's comment, if you read Ed's post, he _agrees_ with the verdict. I have no doubt that should Vas ever clean up Rybka's source, that he could petition the ICGA to remove the ban and they would listen. If enough of the membership agreed, I'm sure they would reconsider. But as of now, the "ban" part is pretty much irrelevant, because even if he were not banned, he could not compete with an obviously illegal entry according to the tournament rules...