OpenChess

I think you grossly misunderstood the intent. Rather than your "let's accept all this copying crap" I think the intent was to tighten the rules to make enforcement easier, as opposed to the rather ridiculous "moving into the 21st century". Early in the panel discussions, we discussed this idea some, how to avoid the RE effort, while protecting commercial programming secrets. Turns out there are multi-key decryption algorithms, where you can require M out of N keys before something can be decrypted, to prevent one person from "peeking into pandora's box". But there are other complex issues, such as verifying that the source or executable submitted is actually what plays during the event. All of it requires a lot of time and effort to pull off. Eventually something will happen, or perhaps such events will simply go away. If enough want "anything goes" anything can be organized online. We've successfully done CCTs for many years now as an example...

hyatt wrote:I think you grossly misunderstood the intent. Rather than your "let's accept all this copying crap" I think the intent was to tighten the rules to make enforcement easier, as opposed to the rather ridiculous "moving into the 21st century". Early in the panel discussions, we discussed this idea some, how to avoid the RE effort, while protecting commercial programming secrets. Turns out there are multi-key decryption algorithms, where you can require M out of N keys before something can be decrypted, to prevent one person from "peeking into pandora's box". But there are other complex issues, such as verifying that the source or executable submitted is actually what plays during the event. All of it requires a lot of time and effort to pull off. Eventually something will happen, or perhaps such events will simply go away. If enough want "anything goes" anything can be organized online. We've successfully done CCTs for many years now as an example...

A post that begins with a lie is not worth a reply.

Ed (poet)

Rebel wrote:

hyatt wrote:I think you grossly misunderstood the intent. Rather than your "let's accept all this copying crap" I think the intent was to tighten the rules to make enforcement easier, as opposed to the rather ridiculous "moving into the 21st century". Early in the panel discussions, we discussed this idea some, how to avoid the RE effort, while protecting commercial programming secrets. Turns out there are multi-key decryption algorithms, where you can require M out of N keys before something can be decrypted, to prevent one person from "peeking into pandora's box". But there are other complex issues, such as verifying that the source or executable submitted is actually what plays during the event. All of it requires a lot of time and effort to pull off. Eventually something will happen, or perhaps such events will simply go away. If enough want "anything goes" anything can be organized online. We've successfully done CCTs for many years now as an example...

A post that begins with a lie is not worth a reply.

Ed (poet)

That's what you and Chris have been advocating for a year now. "This is 21st century, evenyone has access to open source programs, why pick on someone that copies if they make it stronger..."

Sound familiar.

hyatt wrote:

Rebel wrote:

hyatt wrote:I think you grossly misunderstood the intent. Rather than your "let's accept all this copying crap" I think the intent was to tighten the rules to make enforcement easier, as opposed to the rather ridiculous "moving into the 21st century". Early in the panel discussions, we discussed this idea some, how to avoid the RE effort, while protecting commercial programming secrets. Turns out there are multi-key decryption algorithms, where you can require M out of N keys before something can be decrypted, to prevent one person from "peeking into pandora's box". But there are other complex issues, such as verifying that the source or executable submitted is actually what plays during the event. All of it requires a lot of time and effort to pull off. Eventually something will happen, or perhaps such events will simply go away. If enough want "anything goes" anything can be organized online. We've successfully done CCTs for many years now as an example...

A post that begins with a lie is not worth a reply.

Ed (poet)

That's what you and Chris have been advocating for a year now. "This is 21st century, evenyone has access to open source programs, why pick on someone that copies if they make it stronger..."
Sound familiar.

http://www.top-5000.nl/clone.htm

http://74.220.23.57/forum/viewtopic.php?p=453616#453616

http://74.220.23.57/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42916

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=24553

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Rebel wrote:

hyatt wrote:

Rebel wrote:

hyatt wrote:I think you grossly misunderstood the intent. Rather than your "let's accept all this copying crap" I think the intent was to tighten the rules to make enforcement easier, as opposed to the rather ridiculous "moving into the 21st century". Early in the panel discussions, we discussed this idea some, how to avoid the RE effort, while protecting commercial programming secrets. Turns out there are multi-key decryption algorithms, where you can require M out of N keys before something can be decrypted, to prevent one person from "peeking into pandora's box". But there are other complex issues, such as verifying that the source or executable submitted is actually what plays during the event. All of it requires a lot of time and effort to pull off. Eventually something will happen, or perhaps such events will simply go away. If enough want "anything goes" anything can be organized online. We've successfully done CCTs for many years now as an example...

A post that begins with a lie is not worth a reply.

Ed (poet)

That's what you and Chris have been advocating for a year now. "This is 21st century, evenyone has access to open source programs, why pick on someone that copies if they make it stronger..."
Sound familiar.

http://www.top-5000.nl/clone.htm

http://74.220.23.57/forum/viewtopic.php?p=453616#453616

http://74.220.23.57/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42916

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=24553

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Don't like your statements presented in public, eh?