Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Bionic v Crafty - a possible solution

Author: James Long

Date: 16:39:22 01/25/99

Go up one level in this thread


On January 25, 1999 at 12:36:51, Ren Wu wrote:

>Here are my thoughts about this

And here are mine... :-)

>
>I think the only solution is that Bob stop release the new version of Crafty
>source. Instead, he write some text file explain what he have done in the new
>version. In other words, Bob present his new ideas in english, rather in C.


Open source is a double edged sword.  In theory it's a beautiful idea.
In practice it get's abused.  On one hand, it's a way to share
ideas.  In the end, the entire community should benefit.  Inevitably,
others will cash in on everybody else's efforts.

This is something I've thought long and hard about.  I got hooked on computer
chess just over two years ago.  I wrote my first program after reading
Levy's book "How Computers Play Chess."  It was a disaster.  My second
program was much better.  I studied Hyatt's code (and still do), and
implemented a lot of it.  I've also studied Jon Dart's, Don Cross's, GNU,
and probably a couple others I've long since forgotten.  I study them,
but I never do the old "cut and paste."

It would be easy for me *now* to say that source code shouldn't be
provided, but I'd be a hypocrite for it.  Let's be honest here:
how many "chess programmers" have _never_ looked at another's source
code for ideas?  And why not?  Isn't that what it's there for?
It's much easier (for me) to grasp an idea when I can see the
proper implentation....

Looking for ideas is one thing.  Theft is quite another.

I believe I've read Hyatt respond to the question of why he
supplies source code before: to give something back to computer
chess, which has given him so much over the last 30+ yrs.
(Did I get that right Hyatt?)  He has certainly done that.
It's unfortunate that a few thieves here and there could potentially
end this.

Why do you oppose open source?  Because you don't want to see
a fellow programmer get robbed, or because that's just one more
program that's better than yours?  Again, it's a double edged
sword.

I, for one, am eternally grateful to those who have provided source.
I think it takes a lot of "unselfishness."  Hopefully one day
I will come up with an idea or two that will benefit others.
If I do, I'll return the favor.

Just my two cents...

---
James




>
>Personally i don't like the idea that crafty come with source code. I agree that
>source code does provide quite a lot of info, but for *real* programmers, one or
>two lines english is enough to get the idea.
>
>I don't like to let my program play any clones, either in the server or in a
>tournament. I may play some crafties if they say it is a crafty running on a
>different hardware, but i will not play those program who claim it is not crafty
>because they change the compiler switch, add/delete 1 line of code, or whatever.
>
>The flood of crafties is one of the main reason kill my interests to play at
>chess server fics.
>
>Maybe Bob will think twice about this. Other fellow programmers please let us
>know your opinion.
>
>Ren.
>On January 25, 1999 at 08:44:05, Steve Maughan wrote:
>
>>After the huge thread regarding Crafty and Bionic can I suggest a possible
>>solution.
>>
>>How about Dr Hyatt retaining copyright on _part_ of the Crafty code.  For
>>example the MakeMove UnMakeMove section.  This allows budding programmers to
>>probe the _ideas_ behind Crafty eg Null Move, QSearch etc and incorporate them
>>into their own programs.  However, since it would be tough to completely rewrite
>>only the MakeMove, UnMakeMove, it stops them using the entire code as the basis
>>of another program.
>>
>>I must say the idea of dozens of Crafty clones at the next World Championship is
>>a daunting thought.  I think it would ruine the event.
>>
>>Just a suggestion.
>>
>>What do you all think!
>>
>>Steve Maughan



This page took 0.01 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.