Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:47:14 02/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2004 at 16:07:11, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 15, 2004 at 15:52:35, Matthias Gemuh wrote: > >>On February 15, 2004 at 15:07:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >> >>> >>> >>>Here we disagree. I see nothing wrong with starting from some known point, so >>>long as you eventually end up with nothing but your own code... Otherwise you >>>will spend a long time writing all the support stuff, and many lose interest >>>before they get far enough along to actually see their creation play any real >>>chess... >>> >>>IE this is where "C" came from. Changes to "B". Etc... > >Let's suppose that somehere in the process, your algorithms looked considerably >similar to the ones that you started with. > >Then you let people use your program. Someone noticed that some data arrays in >your program were the same as in his. > >A big brew-ha-ha starts. > >Apparently the crime committed is that enough changes were not committed yet to >make it unrecognizable. > >I do not think that this is the path that DanChess did. Rather, he took ideas >from crafty and grafted the algorithms into his program. In doing so, he had to >make changes to each idea that he adopted. > >This is somehow seen as a great crime, but the other not? > >Puzzling to me. It is the copy/replace scheme that seems criminal to me. And >the adoption of ideas that seems totally harmless. I'll remind you once again, I copied _lots_ of ideas over the years, from various people like Slate, Thompson, et. al. But I have never copied _any_ source code from anyone... This is about source, not about ideas. They are different. I would have no problem whatsoever with DanChess had he did what he did, but then evolved things to be significantly different _before_ starting to distribute it as an original chess program.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.