BTO7 wrote:Great poll . In light of BB's paper and the fact i feel its true and honest ....for sure IPPO has done nothing wrong. Looks only the very few feel differently. Its good to have a place like OpenChess to clear the mud. Great job Jeremy ! Time for the rating guys to see the thread and fire up the IPPO family into the ratings. You would think with how boring it must be doing nothing but matches they would actually want to have some stronger engines to match with if only for the fun of it. Amazing Vas has had such a impact with only a play on words for the banning of these awesome engines.
Regards
BT
This poll is actually a clone of another on talkchess and the results are similar though not in the same scale.
LOL love it .....let me guess only the results here are different hehe
BTO7 wrote:Great poll . In light of BB's paper and the fact i feel its true and honest ....for sure IPPO has done nothing wrong. Looks only the very few feel differently. Its good to have a place like OpenChess to clear the mud. Great job Jeremy ! Time for the rating guys to see the thread and fire up the IPPO family into the ratings. You would think with how boring it must be doing nothing but matches they would actually want to have some stronger engines to match with if only for the fun of it. Amazing Vas has had such a impact with only a play on words for the banning of these awesome engines.
Regards
BT
This poll is actually a clone of another on talkchess and the results are similar though not in the same scale.
LOL love it .....let me guess only the results here are different hehe
TC
BT
No no, the results are the same, but just differ in magnitude.
IMO the question is wrong: not ippolit is unethical. the commercial forums (such as hiarcs forum, CCC and rybka forum) censoring people or content about ippolit (etc.) are unethical.
When i buy something somewhere, and there is a batch on the product with claims:
best product, magnificent strength, one of the best soandso...
i think we all have bought those kind of products claim all kind of things,
seriously, who of you believes in the texts those batches claim ?
nobody believes them.
and so is the content in those forums. Its a marketing hype.
when product A has to be launched, suddenly all over the forum
postings about product A praising its strength and coolness appear.
the weaker the product is, the weaker the situation of the shop is, the higher the
need for censorship and rigid deletion of postings has to be.
thorstenczub wrote:IMO the question is wrong: not ippolit is unethical. the commercial forums (such as hiarcs forum, CCC and rybka forum) censoring people or content about ippolit (etc.) are unethical.
When i buy something somewhere, and there is a batch on the product with claims:
best product, magnificent strength, one of the best soandso...
i think we all have bought those kind of products claim all kind of things,
seriously, who of you believes in the texts those batches claim ?
nobody believes them.
and so is the content in those forums. Its a marketing hype.
when product A has to be launched, suddenly all over the forum
postings about product A praising its strength and coolness appear.
the weaker the product is, the weaker the situation of the shop is, the higher the
need for censorship and rigid deletion of postings has to be.
I disagree regarding Hiarcs and Rybka. Those sites were setup for commercial purposes -- to promote their software. Being that computer chess community is quite small, I can understand and tolerate some minor censoring on commercial forums. CCC (recently acquired by Rybka) is a different case. It was supposed to be an open community without commercial influence.
I guess if I was going to make a rocking chair, I would take a look at a few examples. By looking at how others have made this type chair I would probably consciously or unconsciously incorporate design elements into my chair. Would doing this in anyway render my hand made chair illegal or unethical. Of course not.
Would my rocking chair look and perform in a very similar way as the ones I had examined, yes, form follows function.
There's nothing illegal about the issue itself as far as I know, but Vas basically said BB's document is wrong, until he goes in detail I cannot decide whether it's ethical or not to use those engines, till then I won't use the derivatives.
oudheusa wrote:The only paradox is that the authors must believe it is illegal. Otherwise they wouldn't remain anonymous.
There are myriad reasons other than illegality which lead one to be pseudonymous or anonymous on the internet. One simply cannot assume that the one has anything to do with the other. It reminds me of the cryptography debates: "why would you use cryptography unless you have something to hide?"
oudheusa wrote:The only paradox is that the authors must believe it is illegal. Otherwise they wouldn't remain anonymous.
There are myriad reasons other than illegality which lead one to be pseudonymous or anonymous on the internet. One simply cannot assume that the one has anything to do with the other. It reminds me of the cryptography debates: "why would you use cryptography unless you have something to hide?"
.....let me guess only the results here are different hehe
