Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware projec

[Günther Simon]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:42:58:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

[Günther Simon]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:44:13:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:42:58:

[Heinz van Kempen]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Heinz van Kempen at 01 August 2004 19:09:37:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:42:58:

Hi ,
that´s unbelievable and totally against the trend. Thank you very much Ed!!!
Best Regards
Heinz

[Christian Koch]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Christian Koch at 01 August 2004 19:18:56:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:42:58:

A BIG thank you to Ed

[Graham Banks]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Graham Banks at 01 August 2004 20:43:33:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:42:58:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Welcome to the freeware ranks and long may your involvement continue!
Graham.

[François Carré]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: François Carré at 02. August 2004 01:53:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Günther Simon at 01 August 2004 18:42:58:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Uri Blass at 02 August 2004 10:51:00:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: François Carré at 02. August 2004 01:53:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

[Norm Pollock]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Norm Pollock at 02 August 2004 14:09:39:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 02 August 2004 10:51:00:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Uri Blass at 02 August 2004 14:31:05:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Norm Pollock at 02 August 2004 14:09:39:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

[Tord Romstad]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Tord Romstad at 02 August 2004 14:33:24:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Norm Pollock at 02 August 2004 14:09:39:

And don't count out List5.12.

Or Thinker, which in my experience is by far the strongest of them all (at
least in blitz). Perhaps it is just a very difficult opponent for Gothmog.
Tord

[Norm Pollock]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Norm Pollock at 02 August 2004 23:06:33:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 02 August 2004 14:31:05:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

So after 2003 WCCC it can come back as is?
The accusation leading to the disqualification might be true or might be false. But I find it hard to believe it is true because (a) it is imho at least 100 elo better than Crafty, and (b) it is UCI only and Crafty is WB only. But otoh, it might have parts of Crafty.
Fwiw, my home testing says that List 5.12 and Ruffian 1.01 are far and away the two best free programs, not counting ProDeo which I am just beginning to test, and not counting other versions of List and Ruffian.

[Jose Carlos]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 08:44:25:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 02 August 2004 14:31:05:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 09:34:31:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 08:44:25:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

I got the impression that Dan Corbit probably did not see all the source of List(otherwise he could convince the TD later that the accusation was wrong because the accusation was based on some comparison between public version of List and public version of Crafty and I understood from a post in CCC that analysis at 1 ply depth was the same in a lot of positions but the poster did not post more than it).
The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

[Jose Carlos]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 10:30:15:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 09:34:31:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

I got the impression that Dan Corbit probably did not see all the source of List(otherwise he could convince the TD later that the accusation was wrong because the accusation was based on some comparison between public version of List and public version of Crafty and I understood from a post in CCC that analysis at 1 ply depth was the same in a lot of positions but the poster did not post more than it).
The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Not in my country. In Spain, we expect accuser to provide proof to support the accusation. Otherwise, innocence must be assumed.
I would have done exactly what Fritz Reul did. "Prove me guilty or leave me alone".
José C.

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 11:50:41:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 10:30:15:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

I got the impression that Dan Corbit probably did not see all the source of List(otherwise he could convince the TD later that the accusation was wrong because the accusation was based on some comparison between public version of List and public version of Crafty and I understood from a post in CCC that analysis at 1 ply depth was the same in a lot of positions but the poster did not post more than it).
The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Not in my country. In Spain, we expect accuser to provide proof to support the accusation. Otherwise, innocence must be assumed.
I would have done exactly what Fritz Reul did. "Prove me guilty or leave me alone".
José C.

It is the same as an athlet who refused to pass drug test.
You can claim that he is innocent(no proof that he took drugs to help him to get better results) but I am not going to believe in it inspite of no proof that he took drugs.
Uri

[Jose Carlos]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 12:37:43:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 11:50:41:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

I got the impression that Dan Corbit probably did not see all the source of List(otherwise he could convince the TD later that the accusation was wrong because the accusation was based on some comparison between public version of List and public version of Crafty and I understood from a post in CCC that analysis at 1 ply depth was the same in a lot of positions but the poster did not post more than it).
The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Not in my country. In Spain, we expect accuser to provide proof to support the accusation. Otherwise, innocence must be assumed.
I would have done exactly what Fritz Reul did. "Prove me guilty or leave me alone".
José C.

It is the same as an athlet who refused to pass drug test.
You can claim that he is innocent(no proof that he took drugs to help him to get better results) but I am not going to believe in it inspite of no proof that he took drugs.
Uri

Not at all.
1) Drug tests are made randomly, or to the winners, without any accusation whatsoever. You can accept or refuse, but if you refuse, you're not guilty of anything, you just don't accept the rules and can't compete. The issue with List was a formal accusation. I don't accept any accusation without evidence and further proof. It would be perfectly ok to me if the rules of WCCC says "the winner must show his source code" or "3 programs choosen randomly will have to show source code". Yes, I accept that. Fair rules.
2) A drug test doesn't reveal any secrets, you can't copy the athlet's blood or DNA. Demanding a drug test is not demanding to prove innocence, it's just a medical test to control what athlets take, and the only way to control it. Demanding to show the source code is asking to reveal all secrets of your work. Anyone can copy it. BTW, one of the referees in that tournament is part of the Hydra team, so it is ridiculous in my opinion to force any programmer to show his secrets to a competitor.
José C.

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 13:38:51:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 12:37:43:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

I got the impression that Dan Corbit probably did not see all the source of List(otherwise he could convince the TD later that the accusation was wrong because the accusation was based on some comparison between public version of List and public version of Crafty and I understood from a post in CCC that analysis at 1 ply depth was the same in a lot of positions but the poster did not post more than it).
The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Not in my country. In Spain, we expect accuser to provide proof to support the accusation. Otherwise, innocence must be assumed.
I would have done exactly what Fritz Reul did. "Prove me guilty or leave me alone".
José C.

It is the same as an athlet who refused to pass drug test.
You can claim that he is innocent(no proof that he took drugs to help him to get better results) but I am not going to believe in it inspite of no proof that he took drugs.
Uri

Not at all.
1) Drug tests are made randomly, or to the winners, without any accusation whatsoever. You can accept or refuse, but if you refuse, you're not guilty of anything, you just don't accept the rules and can't compete. The issue with List was a formal accusation. I don't accept any accusation without evidence and further proof. It would be perfectly ok to me if the rules of WCCC says "the winner must show his source code" or "3 programs choosen randomly will have to show source code". Yes, I accept that. Fair rules.
2) A drug test doesn't reveal any secrets, you can't copy the athlet's blood or DNA. Demanding a drug test is not demanding to prove innocence, it's just a medical test to control what athlets take, and the only way to control it. Demanding to show the source code is asking to reveal all secrets of your work. Anyone can copy it. BTW, one of the referees in that tournament is part of the Hydra team, so it is ridiculous in my opinion to force any programmer to show his secrets to a competitor.
José C.

When you compete in WCCC you need to accept the rules of the ICGA.
Fritz Reul did not cooperate and he did not had to make his source public and he even did not need to give it to somebody.
As far as I remember Fritz had the possibility to show the code to professor Ernst Heinz who is not active in chess programming and we are not talking about sending the source code to him but only letting him to check if the source is a clone.
The source could remain in his computer.
I also think that the ICGA had some evidence before they asked Fritz to show his source code.
Unfortunately the evidence was not made public and it is better if they make it public but I believe they do not ask for some source with no evidence to suspect it.
Uri

[Jose Carlos]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Jose Carlos at 03 August 2004 14:02:07:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 13:38:51:

http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
Strongest freeware program now? I guess so.
Ed supposes new version of Pro Deo should be even
20-30 points stronger than latest Rebel version.
Günther

Simply amazing ! It is still hard to believe !
Many Thanks to Ed and without any doubt we can say that Pro Deo is the strongest free engine available !

You may be right but I wonder how can you be sure without doubt in a short time that it is better than Ruffian1.0.1 or Aristarch4.50.
If you do not have results that suggest that it is more than 200 elo better than one of them then I am afraid that you cannot even be sure with 95% certainty that it is the strongest free engine available.
Uri

And don't count out List5.12.

I do not forget that List was banned for 2 years (after 2003 WCCC) so I prefer to ignore it because there is a serious suspect that it is not exactly an original program and the programmer did nothing to try to refute the suspect
that it has parts of Crafty.
Uri

I don't think we should discuss that again because there was a long debate in CCC, and that was enough, IMO. The summary, for those who didn't read it, is that: someone suspected List had something of Crafty in it, the tournament rules (according to the TD) obligued Fritz Reul (the programmer of List) to show source code to prove it didn't. Fritz was not present, he had some exams to attend at the university. Fritz didn't show source code. He was punished but no evidence against him was shown to the public. Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was never asked. Dann Corbit had seen List source. He stated he thought it wasn't a clone at all.
I ask to please not debate this again.
José C.

I got the impression that Dan Corbit probably did not see all the source of List(otherwise he could convince the TD later that the accusation was wrong because the accusation was based on some comparison between public version of List and public version of Crafty and I understood from a post in CCC that analysis at 1 ply depth was the same in a lot of positions but the poster did not post more than it).
The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Not in my country. In Spain, we expect accuser to provide proof to support the accusation. Otherwise, innocence must be assumed.
I would have done exactly what Fritz Reul did. "Prove me guilty or leave me alone".
José C.

It is the same as an athlet who refused to pass drug test.
You can claim that he is innocent(no proof that he took drugs to help him to get better results) but I am not going to believe in it inspite of no proof that he took drugs.
Uri

Not at all.
1) Drug tests are made randomly, or to the winners, without any accusation whatsoever. You can accept or refuse, but if you refuse, you're not guilty of anything, you just don't accept the rules and can't compete. The issue with List was a formal accusation. I don't accept any accusation without evidence and further proof. It would be perfectly ok to me if the rules of WCCC says "the winner must show his source code" or "3 programs choosen randomly will have to show source code". Yes, I accept that. Fair rules.
2) A drug test doesn't reveal any secrets, you can't copy the athlet's blood or DNA. Demanding a drug test is not demanding to prove innocence, it's just a medical test to control what athlets take, and the only way to control it. Demanding to show the source code is asking to reveal all secrets of your work. Anyone can copy it. BTW, one of the referees in that tournament is part of the Hydra team, so it is ridiculous in my opinion to force any programmer to show his secrets to a competitor.
José C.

When you compete in WCCC you need to accept the rules of the ICGA.
Fritz Reul did not cooperate and he did not had to make his source public and he even did not need to give it to somebody.
As far as I remember Fritz had the possibility to show the code to professor Ernst Heinz who is not active in chess programming and we are not talking about sending the source code to him but only letting him to check if the source is a clone.
The source could remain in his computer.
I also think that the ICGA had some evidence before they asked Fritz to show his source code.
Unfortunately the evidence was not made public and it is better if they make it public but I believe they do not ask for some source with no evidence to suspect it.
Uri

True. But that rule was not objective. It was up to the TD to decide if the evidence they had was enough. That's bad rules. The rules I suggested are much better, but we wouldn't see commercial programs playing then, which is a point in favor of Fritz Reul in this case.
That, to say the least, makes no sense. If I need to check for Crafty code in other program I need to study it carefully. It's a very serious accusation to just have a 5 minutes look and say "yep, looks like a clone, let's disqualify him". Either the TD should have needed to copy the code and study it for hours or he should have studided it in FR's computer for hours. In either case, the TD could remember all the original ideas and use them for his own benefit.
The same reason why you can distrust FR (keeping his code secret) is enough to me to distrust the TD (keeping the evidence secret). The difference is that the TD was conducting an accusation. So, at any rate, FR earned the right to be considered innocent.
I prefer not to believe in such conjectures about people that accuse and punishes without proof. I believe in facts, and ICCA provided zero facts.
I want to insist in the difference with the drug test, because it's very important here: objective rules to make controls to participants -> no accusations needed -> no proof needed -> fair and equal rules; subjective rule that "I can ask whoever I want to show me his code if I suspect he's a cloner" -> accusation made -> proof needed (at the very least) -> subjective and stupid rules -> PROBLEMS.
I also want to make clear that I'm not talking as a moderator of this forum here, but only giving my personal opinions.
José C.

[Eric Oldre]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Eric Oldre at 03. August 2004 18:00:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro Deo) geschrieben von:/posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 09:34:31:

The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Could I ask what Fritz did today to refute the claims? I don't see any posts by him on either this site or CCC, and his home page is not in english. (my only language), so i can't tell if he posted some relevant information on it.
Eric

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Uri Blass at 03 August 2004 19:04:58:
Als Antwort auf:/In reply to: Re: Sensational news! Former known Rebel becomes freeware project!(new name Pro geschrieben von:/posted by: Eric Oldre at 03. August 2004 18:00:

The fact is that until today Fritz Reul did nothing to refute the accusation and as far as I know he did not complain about the fact that list was banned when I expect innocent author to do something if he think that he was banned without justification.
Uri

Could I ask what Fritz did today to refute the claims? I don't see any posts by him on either this site or CCC, and his home page is not in english. (my only language), so i can't tell if he posted some relevant information on it.
Eric

It seems that there is a misunderstanding(english is not my first language).
I did not mean to say that he did something today.
I meant to say that he simply did nothing to refute the claims at the time of my post(I used the words until today because I did not want my post to be wrong because of something that he does after it).
Uri