OpenChess

Since many still seem unclear (or misinformed) about the Rybka evidence with the ICGA, a few months ago I prepared (in part for the FSF) a recapitulation of it. I attach the PDF (I call it "brief", but it is 31 pages). Of course, those who already know the evidence likely need not read it, and those who don't know it probably won't read it, so this could probably be classified in the "paperweight" category..

One major mistake. You WROTE this. The people that are arguing the loudest have not read the ICGA report or accompanying evidence. So you expect them to rectify that shortcoming by actually reading this?

You need to use less text and more pictures. Maybe even almost nothing but pictures. It would be FAR easier to convince the folks on the Rybka Forum that the Mayan calandar DOES signal the end of the world late this year...

hyatt wrote:One major mistake. You WROTE this. The people that are arguing the loudest have not read the ICGA report or accompanying evidence. So you expect them to rectify that shortcoming by actually reading this?

You need to use less text and more pictures. Maybe even almost nothing but pictures. It would be FAR easier to convince the folks on the Rybka Forum that the Mayan calandar DOES signal the end of the world late this year...

Someone should be working on a point/counterpoint document to publish as a rebuttal on ChessBase after the remaining part(s) of the current article series come out. Whether they'll publish it, who knows, but the generalities and glosses being put forth in Søren's document demand a succinct refutation.

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

hyatt wrote:One major mistake. You WROTE this. The people that are arguing the loudest have not read the ICGA report or accompanying evidence. So you expect them to rectify that shortcoming by actually reading this?

You need to use less text and more pictures. Maybe even almost nothing but pictures. It would be FAR easier to convince the folks on the Rybka Forum that the Mayan calandar DOES signal the end of the world late this year...

Someone should be working on a point/counterpoint document to publish as a rebuttal on ChessBase after the remaining part(s) of the current article series come out. Whether they'll publish it, who knows, but the generalities and glosses being put forth in Søren's document demand a succinct refutation.

We (David, Mark, Harvey, etc) had discussed this. We wanted to wait until the whole thing was revealed. Mark W has already published a nice summary of the entire process and evidence. Next I guess we need to take this thing point by point. And Ed's web page point by point. And eviscerate both at the same time since they are both based on factual errors and intentionally false statements in equal parts.

BB+ wrote:Since many still seem unclear (or misinformed) about the Rybka evidence with the ICGA, a few months ago I prepared (in part for the FSF) a recapitulation of it. I attach the PDF (I call it "brief", but it is 31 pages). Of course, those who already know the evidence likely need not read it, and those who don't know it probably won't read it, so this could probably be classified in the "paperweight" category..

This is a very comprehensive and extremely readable summary of the evidence (and of some of the criticism against said). Thanks very much for having taken the time to compile it.

hyatt wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

hyatt wrote:One major mistake. You WROTE this. The people that are arguing the loudest have not read the ICGA report or accompanying evidence. So you expect them to rectify that shortcoming by actually reading this?

You need to use less text and more pictures. Maybe even almost nothing but pictures. It would be FAR easier to convince the folks on the Rybka Forum that the Mayan calandar DOES signal the end of the world late this year...

Someone should be working on a point/counterpoint document to publish as a rebuttal on ChessBase after the remaining part(s) of the current article series come out. Whether they'll publish it, who knows, but the generalities and glosses being put forth in Søren's document demand a succinct refutation.

We (David, Mark, Harvey, etc) had discussed this. We wanted to wait until the whole thing was revealed. Mark W has already published a nice summary of the entire process and evidence. Next I guess we need to take this thing point by point. And Ed's web page point by point. And eviscerate both at the same time since they are both based on factual errors and intentionally false statements in equal parts.

Wonderful.

Start here: http://www.top-5000.nl/pst.htm

Rebel wrote:

hyatt wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

hyatt wrote:One major mistake. You WROTE this. The people that are arguing the loudest have not read the ICGA report or accompanying evidence. So you expect them to rectify that shortcoming by actually reading this?

You need to use less text and more pictures. Maybe even almost nothing but pictures. It would be FAR easier to convince the folks on the Rybka Forum that the Mayan calandar DOES signal the end of the world late this year...

Someone should be working on a point/counterpoint document to publish as a rebuttal on ChessBase after the remaining part(s) of the current article series come out. Whether they'll publish it, who knows, but the generalities and glosses being put forth in Søren's document demand a succinct refutation.

We (David, Mark, Harvey, etc) had discussed this. We wanted to wait until the whole thing was revealed. Mark W has already published a nice summary of the entire process and evidence. Next I guess we need to take this thing point by point. And Ed's web page point by point. And eviscerate both at the same time since they are both based on factual errors and intentionally false statements in equal parts.

Wonderful.

Start here: http://www.top-5000.nl/pst.htm

We will probably address that cesspool of misinformation as well. You didn't do yourself any favors there, I can tell you...

One thing that I might add, particularly as I doubt Riis/ChessBase will touch the Rybka/Crafty evidence, is that Rajlich's entries into Deville's tournaments meet the common law requirements for fraud.

In that:

*) Rajlich represented that his Rybka submission(s) was original.
*) This has material import to an author-based tournament.
*) This is false.
*) Rajlich knew it was false.
*) Rajlich intended that Deville should act as if the Rybka submission was original.
*) Deville did not know that Rajlich's representation was false.
*) Deville relied on the truth of Rajilch's representation.
*) Deville had a right to rely on the truth of Rajilch's representation.
*) Deville suffered by having a unwanted entrant in his tournament.

About the only one that is debatable is #4, where maybe VR was alternatively negligent, which is not much of a defense. Given the ElChinito history in mid-2004, even this seems impassable with his last Rybka submission.

This is in addition to any copyright infringement issues with Crafty/Hyatt.