To me the most interesting aspect of this situation is the fact that the source code is freely accessible. No matter how clever one team of programmers is, the open source-method virtually guarantees a better end result in the long run.

I think in a few years all software, so chess software too, will be free. Companies will make money by selling services, not products.
And chess engines will become so strong that the art of programming will be to make analysis understandable for human beings.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are about to lose control.

How is it that you install these chess engines? I downloaded it, but where do I go from there? Can anyone please help me?

There you go, buri. One excellent reason to buy official software is that you get neat manuals, support and guarantatees. With open source software, you have to figure things out for yourself :-)

@ buri: i got the same problem... most programs are packed by winzip, 7zip (the .7z extension) or simular programs... just type the extension (.7z or .rar f.e.) in google and you will find the rigst program to unpack and then install the chess engine

Download and install Arena 2.0.1 from: http://www.playwitharena.com/

Then "Engines" --> "Install new engine"...

Which of these programs are compatible with Mac OSX? Would be happy to hear someone knowledgeable expound on the subject of chess engines for Mac computers!

Firebird can very well be quicker and still be a clone of Rybka. By tweeking some of the heavy time consuming trees you can make a program easily much faster. On fast timecontrols this will often lead to better performances but on the slower normally this should give a disadvantage if the programmed knowledge in the timeconsuming trees is well done.

Personally I find it incredibly unlikely that one can build a superprogram in such short timeframe. As an experienced progammer I know how much time it takes to make a proper program from scratch. One has to start from some other source and today there aren't much available supercodes available so an illegal copy is the most likely scenario. It can be Rybka but also Naum and Deep Shredder are valid choices to start from.

I am strongly against copying software. Programmers need to spend countless hours in coding, testing,... so I find it justice that if you use their labour that you pay for it. If everybody decides that you don't need to pay then there will be very little new software still made.

The whole matter is going on for a very long time as can be seen on the different chessforums (also indicated by Smeets). The number of illegal downloads and illegal copies has only increased the last decade. I don't see a fully trustable solution for the nearby future.

From legal point it's rather clear to me: Those engines are heavily based on Rybka code, therefore the license they use is not valid, as copyrighted material was used and publishing code from someone else with just another license is not legal of course.

These are the reasons why the cloners don't use their real names. Only Norman Schmitt, who is known for releasing clones as new engines and trying to make money with it, uses his real name for his version of the clone (afaik).

It's a bit sad that people use those clones and some even think it's right to do so. About the playing strength: The only way to really test it is playing a lot of games. There the clones are apparently slightly stronger at fast time controls and weaker or as strong as Rybka at slow time controls. It looks like the clones don't use all the Rybka code and are some kind of crippled Rybka that is slightly faster therefore.

To summarize: Downloading those clones is almost the same as pirating Rybka, which was already very common apparently. It damages all engine authors, since the sales for the legal (ie. original) engines will most probably drop and leads to a different situation on the market, so that authors probably won't publish their engines as "local" versions anymore to protect the code.

About this article: It's questionable if linking to such material is right from legal and moral point of view.

Felix Kling
(Rybka webmaster)

@test: that is also one of the points I express in the article, but perhaps Vincent Diepeveen can answer it in more detail, since I suspect he is the biggest expert on this issue that has commented on it so far.

Lol indeed, i also downloaded Firebird...

so i organized a lil ' match between Rybka 3 32bit & Firebird 1.2 32w,
i dont know if i messed up w/ the parameters(though it looked fair) but Rybka got raped in blitz in this match...

So i too will switch cause i dont spend hours on analysis, and the quicker the better in this case...

In complete agreement with "Jarvis".
The matter of compatibility of these new chess engines with Mac OS X is important, the more so that the millions of users of IMacs, and more so, iPhones, IPod touch, and the coming iPads would hugely expand the use of such engines, and benefit the popularity of chess, which is so uniquely well adapted to displays on the screens of all Apple hardware.

There are lots of discussion about the Rybka/Fruit "cloning" (using cloning loosely) at the talkchess board, but all these discussions were moved to a forum only visible to subscribers - and this evidence could be found also on the rybka forum, but again, in a subscribers only subforum.

About the Rybka cloning Fruit (and Fruit 2.1 is still open-source and can be easily found), the evidence provided showed that Rajlich was not honest when asked about how much of the strength of Rybka came from Fruit (he said very little, but it seems to be a lot), however, about using Fruit code (which would characterise copyright infringement), the case was not so clear, and some people believe there was code copying, some don't.

Regarding Firebird, it is NOT open source, and the "developer" (again, using the term loosely) has been exposed twice already cloning chess engines - this time, cloning in a strict sense, using the source code of open source engines (Toga and Viper), and releasing as if they were his own, closed source engines.

As a chess programmer i studied Ivanhoe/Firebird. First of all it's total different from IPPOLIT. Ippolit is a lot weaker, has a worse evaluation function and is not using all processors in the system if you have more than 1.

The changes, especially the parallel ones, are total non trivial even for big experts. Maybe half a dozen programmers on the planet is capable of carrying this out on their own.

It's also several programmers who worked at it, and it's obviously no Russians, as not a single Russian is capable of strong parallel programming on his own in this field. That's just a cover for western programmers.

From the styleguide used we can see it is a mix of NASA styleguide with a more senior programmer who worked in the code who is just doing whatever he likes to do.

Russian styleguide you can see well in the first released clone of rybka 1.0 which is strelka. Russians use total other styleguide, which confirms what the russian programmers posted on the forums - that they have nothing to do with this.

Some of the programmers names listed, if you translate them to English also are rather suspected and translate to western names like Robert Fischer.

These styleguides get used also in Germany and Netherlands. Not so much elsewhere. This doesn't come as a surprise to me if you realize where those experts live. Please note that NASA type organisations in the US have no persons who are expert in this field. They're all living in and around Netherlands. With 1 of them living just over the border in France and another one furthest away lives in Muenchen.

The real question is who pays for it. So much nontrivial work which requires good parallel programming skills (which again only half a dozen of experts in game tree search on this planet have) and another one for evaluation and another one for search. Then you need testing and management.

So the first time to create all this was really years of work.

When i tried counting i came to 5 programmers who can carry it out. If i subtract myself from that it's 4. I know them all by name and speak with most of them regurarly, so i can assure you that if one of them has been doing this, it was a fulltime paid contract.

The alternative for this is hire half NSA which costs millions as you need a far bigger team then to get it done. Obviously that's not what anyone would do, just hire an expert to get it done.

I do not know who pays for this, but all these guys are commercial guys and this is total fulltime work to get accomplished. You don't do this in 'your spare time'. Also it requires extensive testing at big hardware, nearly no one has such machines at home.

It is a blind guess who paid for this. Maybe some burocrat wrote down a signature too much somewhere. From government viewpoint of course throwing a few million away is no big deal, that's their core job. I wouldn't know a single company which would do this.

Yet it again gives computerchess more attention of course, be it in the wrong manner. I've already seen a dozen arabs around here now. Not sure why. Maybe they like seeing source codes.

This is not open source at all. Be warned. Using this code can have serious consequences as it is all copyrighted code.

I want to make clear however that i have nothing to do with all this. I didn't get hired for this project. Seems they pay for this sort of work also a very low fee, $30 an hour. Now of course dozens of people all together have been involved in this, so i doubt any of those 4 others has clean hands here, they all love to get hired on a pay by hour basis.

Most likely they all got hired.

Even very tiny details have been 'fixed', which is incredible really. We already saw this in Rybka code of course; the material evaluation which already was really great, was suddenly rewritten by yet another clown using a neural network.

Total independant part of the code it is obviously.

Some 'similar' engines do not share this code, i wonder why. I guess only 1 contractor paid for it and it was carried out by 1 specific person (could be many programmers who did do the job, though the person who qualifies most also posted publicly on the internet he has been busy tuning material with a neural network and that it was years of fulltime work and "only" brought 20 elo, which IMHO is a lot for just 1 small yet important part of the evaluation).

So where they worked real professional everywhere, of course it doesn't have really a lot of chess knowledge yet.

It's all based upon tuning. That tuningscode you can find nowhere, they keep that part secret, even the method how it gets done is secret, ensuring them to get hired again if another organisation is interested.

So you can toy at home sirs, but you don't have that huge computational power that is needed to tune it well. You realize how much energy i burn at home for that, and i still don't have that much like what was used for this.

Either you put in a lot of chessknowledge in the chess engine, like i do, or you are really dependant upon huge supercomputing power from some very big government organisation, as tuning has to compensate for lack of knowledge.

We don't have that hardware in the Netherlands even needed for this and Netherlands has really big hardware.

So forget about Russia or any other nation without huge supercomputers that scientists can toy with just for fun.

Thanks,
Vincent

@Felix: agreed about the direct linking, so I removed this. However, I don't see what's wrong with linking to wikispace or wikipedia pages.

@nep: discussions are fine with me, as long as they're polite and deal with arguments and not insults. In fact, I think discussions are an important and vital source of information, especially in such obscure areas as open source and software cloning. If it gets us closer to the truth, all the better!

what a great site. our family really loves the game of chess and we love your blog

"Personally I find it incredibly unlikely that one can build a superprogram in such short timeframe."

Yes, but the same can be said about Rybka. The Fritz, Shredder, Junior programmers had been working on their programs for years and years, then suddenly out of nowhere comes Rybka and leaves them all in the dust. Equally hard to believe.

If these new engines are reverse engineered from Rybka that's wrong. If Rybka was based on some other open source program that was freely available, I don't see how this is wrong.

On the moral issue for the consumer: it's clear you are doing something you are not supposed to when you install a copied version of Microsoft Office for example.
But if it is unclear whether some program is an illegal clone, I suppose the user could be excused. If it's just word against word, who do you believe?

(The average user is not a programmer. I for one just have to take other people's word for whether or not some program is a clone or not.
To be fair from reading all this I do get the impression that these new programs are clones, but again; ultimately it's word against word and I wouldn't put it above the Rybka team to make these allegations just to protect their product.)

The problem with the moral issue in general is that even though there are certain laws in place, that does not mean the consumer has to agree with them. Laws are passed far above the consumers' head. Many laws are unjust. I don't feel bad when I break a law that is morally unjust.

Then there is the matter of unethical behavior by companies and corporations. As an example: I don't feel bad installing a ripped off Windows because Microsoft is know to have used unethical business behavior to force this abomination down our throats and is basically extorting us by forcing us to buy a new version every other year.

You should correct the link to the decemberists.
The band isn't bad, but still.

About the engine. Maybe they use some ideas of other engines, and add a bit of their own, just like writers do in their articles. But I will surely use Robolitto until I see some proof of copyright infringement.

@S: Oops, corrected :-)

@Vincent Diepeveen: Thanks for the information! I've updated the article with a reference to your comment.

for noobies like me: download the engine, unzip it and copy the 'exe(cutable)' file and paste it in the engine folder. For me it was under C > Program Files > Chessbase > Engines.UCI and paste the .exe file here. Then just start your interface (for me it was Fritz11) and go to 'Engine > New UCI engine et voilà

Facinating discussion and information, thanks Arne! Excellent job as always.

My feeling is that it's best to stick with reputable companies and individuals. While it's a bit seductive dealing with mavericks (i.e., Neo in the "Matrix" movies), at the end of the day there's a lot to be said for paying for a service/product and the support that comes with it (i.e., legal obligations defined, etc.).

I'd rather pay the cost of a good or service and know that it's back by reasonable guarantees of support, rather than get something for free and "take my chances." Also, I very much enjoy being paid for my work, and I want to fairly compensate those who provide for me.

In short, "Quid pro quo".

Some of the reactions here are truly breathtaking.

The (not so) underlying idea that (open source == piracy) just show an outstanding lack of understanding bringing us back to the good old 2000s when Microsoft equated GNU/Linux with some kind of communist cancer. And indeed, some of the comments here (and parts of the otherwise interesting article) are on that same level. Next thing you'll tell me if that I'm a dangerous pirate because I'm using an open-source operating system.

Never heard of Firebird before (well I did, but it's a open-source database product http://www.firebirdsql.org/). That said, it must be stressed that reverse-engineering is not illegal (not everywhere at least). People saying that somehow the russian guys are stealing copyrighted material obviously have no idea how code decompiling works (if indeed only reverse engineering was used here, and not true code stealing).

That doesn't mean that it's really ethical though and yes, I understand that it is infuriating. However, if the article is correct, it may well be that nothing illegal is going on.

Ayumi

Is it some kind of april's day fool?

Arne Moli, I don't think Vincent's comment is credible. It's full of fantasies and visibly full of hate too (see the comments about the arabs). I think linking to his comment in your article is not a very good thing as I think it is enough to completely discredit it.

The only explantation I can think of is that it's some kind of joke...

Ayumi

Ayumi, I don't believe commenters here think open source = piracy, as this distinction is clear to anyone who read the article (or followed the hyperlink to the article on smashingmagazine.com). As you say yourself, the question is whether this particular open source software is based on hacking or not. I don't see what's unclear about this.

stockfish chess engine is also free and strong as rybka 3

Stockfish is also new Chessbomb engine...

The article incorrectly states that Firebird is an open-source engine. It's not - the author has never released its source code. Firebird is based on the Ippolit/Igorrit/RobboLito/IvanHoe sources, but this doesn't make it open-source itself.

@Ayumi: I'm using Ubuntu and a lot of other open source software. But the problem with licenses like the GPL is that some people may publish code under it while not being the authors of the code.

About Rybka and Fruit: Rybka is influenced by Fruit, but not based on it. Vas' code is 100% original. There are some techniques from Fruit that are in any chess engine now, so it's just part of the development of chess engines. Actually spreading ideas is one of the ideas of making code open source, it speeds up development.

@Arne: The wikispaces page you are linking to offers direct download links for those clones. It also contains obviously wrong "information", like fake names for the hackers and so on. I don't see why it makes a difference if such a page is a wiki page or not.

About stockfish: It is a strong and afaik completely original engine, so it's good to use it. But it's not as strong as Rybka 3 (yet), see e.g. http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/

As a GNU/Linux user, I know there are a lot of very strong free open source chess engines available, & I feel it is morally better to use them (though I have bought a copy of Rybka) & Scid (again I have bought ChessBase twice), & GNU/ Linux (again I have bought versions of XP, Vista & 7).

I don't like the idea of programs that usually originate in other people's ideas being fenced off by commercial interests that claim that they own them so the public can be forced to pay for them.

Glaurung is over 3000 Elo & its author Tord Romstad says that he refuses to commercialise it,in part because :

"Another important factor is that trying to sell my engine would probably force me to close my source code in order to keep a competitive advantage towards other chess programmers. Because I think sharing and cooperation in computer chess leads to more rapid progress than secrecy and competition, closing my source code is a very unattractive option to me."

He also makes the point : "It could also be argued that the cause of cloning is not the existence of open source chess programs, but the very fact that releasing a chess program without source code is considered acceptable. If all chess programs were released with full source code, cloning a chess engine and getting away with it would be impossible."

Long live Richard Stallman !

http://wiki.winehq.org/MacOSX/Installing

i dont know if with it, you can run windows programs on osx

from http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/fre-chessengine-firebird-better-...

"by myou27:
It is not a rumor that Rybka comes from Fruit. The parsing code and the time management are nearly direct in the copying of code. The chess stuff is also a lot of the same, but the numbres are more tuned in the evaluation. The search changes the pruning and the material tables are also added. The base of it looks still like Fruit. The hash tables are about the same though Rybka has changed those in later versions. The other "major change" from Fruit (Letouzey) to Rybka (Rajlich) was to rewrite it for bitboards to make it 3 times faster on 64 bit CPU, but a programmer said that takes maybe 3 hours once you having a working implementation of both Fruit and bitboards around. Rybka just uses Crafty bitboards so making them is easy. Also the node counts and depth were <> by "Vas" likely to try to coverup this, plus the sales pitch was that Rybka was a <> engine rather than a fast one. Mr. Letouzey appears unminding because Rybka only copied ideas and not GPL code."

I take from this that everybody copies from everybody else. So Rajlich taking the moral high ground here sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Still, rules are rules; one shouldn't clone a commercial closed source program and release it in the wild. (IF that is what actually happened.)

From the video interview with Rajlich I take it that the cloud computing thing is a godsend as it allows Rajlich to keep making improvements without having to worry about everybody else copying him and catching up for free.

@Jarvis & @Roo Bookaroo:

Robbolito was easy to compile for Mac OS X. However, the later branches (Igorrit, IvanHoe) start using Windows-specific multithreading, and so are not suitable for the Mac. You might be able to run them under WINE, though.

Despite the single threading, I found Robbolito to be stronger at fast time controls than other Mac engines: Stockfish, HIARCS, Rybka 2.2n2, Toga II, and Fruit.

What a strange situation; I'd be perfectly willing to pay for a version of Rybka which works seamlessly on my Mac (not the microwine hack). Instead I have to use Robbolito for free because no one is claiming authorship!

After further reflection upon this and other articles in the past several months, I'd have to say that Arne certainly is doing the best job of interesting chess journalism in recent memory. Keep of the good work Arne!

From the Talkchess.com link above in the article:

"by myou27:
It is not a rumor that Rybka comes from Fruit. The parsing code and the time management are nearly direct in the copying of code. The chess stuff is also a lot of the same, but the numbres are more tuned in the evaluation. The search changes the pruning and the material tables are also added. The base of it looks still like Fruit. The hash tables are about the same though Rybka has changed those in later versions. The other "major change" from Fruit (Letouzey) to Rybka (Rajlich) was to rewrite it for bitboards to make it 3 times faster on 64 bit CPU, but a programmer said that takes maybe 3 hours once you having a working implementation of both Fruit and bitboards around. Rybka just uses Crafty bitboards so making them is easy. Also the node counts and depth were <> by "Vas" likely to try to coverup this, plus the sales pitch was that Rybka was a <> engine rather than a fast one. Mr. Letouzey appears unminding because Rybka only copied ideas and not GPL code."

I take from this that everybody copies from everybody else. So Rajlich taking the moral high ground here sounds a bit hypocritical to me.

Of course it depends on what exactly we are talking about. It seems clear to me that everybody steals from everybody else. But making an exact copy of a commercial closed source program and then releasing it into the wild under another name for free is wrong. (IF that is what actually happened.)

From the video interview with I take it that the cloud computing thing is a godsend for software developers as it enables them to make improvements without having to worry about everybody else copying them. (Of course it also allows programmers to copy stuff themselves without having to worry about anybody else finding out.)

@Onestone: Rajlich himself calls the programs open source, so now I'm confused myself. I'm no expert but if the source isn't open how can the source even be compared with other programs such as Rybka?

@Felix: It's really impossible to remove all links to sites that potentially link to the download pages. You really can't expect people to check this all the time - we are not living in China! As Jan Smeets notes, a simple Google search will suffice. Surely you're not implying we should stop mentioning Google as well? I think it's just the nature of the internet that pages are linked to each other and create a, well, a web. I don't see how it's possible to fight this and what's the point.
By the way, I did write in my article that the wikispace-page contains 'incoherent nonsense', so readers are warned. Isn't this enough?

Arne, afaik this page is the main website of that clone. If it would just link to some other page, this would be something different.

Downloaded Firebird and Ivanhoe today. Rybka just died on me so I switched from Little Fish to Big Bird - ABC, simple as Sesame

@Arne: Rajlich called an unspecified engine "open-source" (presumably the original Ippolit). Firebird came several months later. Do you see Firebird's source code available anywhere on its site? I don't. This TalkChess thread discusses that further: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33139 (registration is required)

Rajlich's idea to have future versions of rybka login from servers is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I wouldn't pay 2 cents to use that bs. If I can't install a copy on my computer, you can forget the whole thing. In this way, he is PUSHING users to find other computers like these supposed 'clones'

@ test (If Rybka was based on some other open source program that was freely available, I don’t see how this is wrong.)

I do. The license of open source programs generally prohibits use of the code in commercial products. So if Rybka programmers lifted and used Fruit source code, it's quite possibly illegal.

Now the Rybka folks say that they didn't actually use the source code, they just reverse engineered it. (They studied it carefully and emulated it, which is the same thing.) Thereby the Rybka team acknowledges that reverse engineering is acceptable. The Decembrists obviously didn't have Rybka source code; the most they could have done is reverse engineer. So how could Rybka accuse the Decembrists of wrong-doing? They themselves did the same thing.

Cloud computing has a lot of advantages. Google Docs is an example and presumably quite popular.
It also has disadvantages. You need an internet connection. And you do not own a copy of the application. So if the owner of the application decides "no more soup for you" then that's it, you are out of luck. Another aspect is privacy. For examle as a company I would not trust my documents into the hands of some other corporation like Google, no matter how "Don't be evil" they pretend to be.

For a chess engine it makes a lot of sense. It's cost effective or cheaper if you are interested in always having the latest hardware and the latest version available, or as Rajlich put it always having the strongest version in existence.

Bravo Arne! Awesome article

On the CCRL Discussion Board they say they are not testing these new engines because and I quote: "We will not test any engines or derivatives of engines that have anonymous authors."

They could have deleted the part "or derivatives of engines" because it is redundant. They don't test because the authors are anonymous.

I agree that it's funny that they remain anonymous, but it does not prove anything. Does anybody have any concrete proof about the supposed cloning or whatever it is btw? I haven't seen it yet while googling around about this and am about to stop now. ;)

I will just jump in here without reading long post above.

Usually I found free software is OK only for light working. I used OpenOffice,but if you think MS Office is suck, this free Openoffice will be more frustrated you. Same goes to LINUX, I've been waiting 10 years+ to see how Linux can answer my profesional work, but till now I better buy proprietary software because they are realiable. You spend money for the reason. If you compare free software like GIMP vs Photoshop that is a wide differences that explain why Photoshop is not free.

For Chess, since most users need no / less ergonomic, can stand more crashes, the free software written by non commercial programmer is still realiable .

Out of the ippolit family Ivanhoe is the strongest and has the most cutting edge release cycle.
Ivanhoe's version numbers are slightly confusing, The lower the version number the newer the release.
i.e Ivanhoev73 is older than Ivanhoe63 (current)
Whats most striking is that Ivanhoev63 is at least 100 elo points stronger at longer time controls also ( 50/3 ) on a 8 core i7 970

I agree with the article, since there is allot of people who want the truth of a chess position regardless of the chess engines name and are bored by the red-tape antics of the commercial enterprises.

In my opinion we have a right to use whatever gives the most accurate analysis, be it commercial or GPL

Here are some links to the latest version:

http://depositfiles.com/files/pfe3ele52
http://www.mediafire.com/?jzt0mmz3zmz
http://speedshare.org/download.php?id=4764FD4711
http://www.zshare.net/download/7429917678ad0939/

/R

the links are a little outdated Angels 77 promotes IvanHoe freely , as we do opening books for computer chess
We suspect Vas waits untill after April 22nd ( Stalins day ) which may hail the final mourners leaving Deep R.I.P$ykba3 mourners leaving its creamation ,before he dares raise $ykba4 from its ashes
http://morethanchessagame.forumotion.com

good to have a free engine source code atlest everyone use it and play and analysis from it ...in this way the chess game is spread far and wide and reach every people unlike rybka using money for game......i always suport programmer who contributed this firebird ,ivanhoe,ippolit,robbo...if vas claimed it to be clone why cant vas explain from which engine he too cloned rybka??????? Its not abt chess engine vas is taking abt superiority of his and money over others chess programmer ..but he should learn that he is not the only programmer in the world and his fish can also be swallowed by another big bird or fish....why cant he came out on public debate and prove his claim of clone simply beacuse if u sater one finger on other u will find one fist staring on you.......bcoz he is also using some cloned programe like fruit to make rybka3 ...The computer chess engine is not come in four yrs time its history is long and any improvement of it is based on the underlying knowledge available ..vaas has not discovered or invented he just improved the chess engine and iggorit and firebird or ivanhoe is also improving their chess engine .....no matter which source code and wat engenieering ..atlest they are providing it free to every people who luv playing chess and improve their game.........so i truly support all the improvement and advancement this open source engine and giving every individual a change to PLAY THE GAME AND NOT FOR MONEY...
Thanks...........checkmate4u

I add the engine (fruit 2.3.1) in my list of fritz 10 programme's.
Then I organised a match (a blitz (50) and a rapid( 10) ) between Fritz 10 and fruit 2.3.1.
But the most games (with blitz and rapid) where won by fritz 10, how is that possible??? I read that fruit a clone of Rybka is, but my fritz is still stronger.
I havn't done anyting with the parameters, ....

Mmh. Actually you get the same problem as the big chess fora. Now this article is the start for people to spread clone links and so on :(

Like Smeets says, the ELO difference between the strongest engines is trivial. Why not download and support engine authors whose license is, as Chessbomb says, the least ambiguous. Therefore I use Glaurung, Stockfish, and Fruit all day long with no guilt or question or concern for who and who isn't getting paid or stealing.

As Lance Armstrong would say, "It's not about the engine". It's about Chess.

You cannot provide proof because you know deep in your heart that the IPPOLIT family engines (Robbolito, Ippolit, FireBird, Iggorit, IvanHoe) are not clones. All you can do is give false accusations, and you cannot even defend yourself, you cannot show anything to prove your false claims. I don't understand why other people still believe you. The good thing is, lots of people everyday are starting to believe that Ippolit engines ARE NOT CLONES (Oh yes, even the die-hard members of your "Rybka Religion" are beginning to see the light to the right path) Why? I guess that is your fault because you cannot provide any proof to support your claims. As we all know, a lie is always difficult to prove.

God forbid people find the website Google because who knows, they might use it for, you know, searching stuff?

And where's the proof?

@Felix: yes, there are people spreading links to open source software (though not all of them clones, surely), but there are also people talking sensibly and sharing valuable information, which could even lead to change in or better understanding of the current situation.
Felix, you sound like a reasonable person. I don't see how you can oppose sharing objective information, be it in my article or in the comments - opposing this sounds pretty medieval to me. Or, as Jack Nicholson said in A Few Good Men: "You can't handle the truth!" Is that really your point of view?

Well, I bought Deep Rybka 3/Aquarium but still use a lot of free engines for analysis and tournaments. On a practical level the controversy around clones has nothing to do with the interests of the average users. We just want the best engines and all the more if they can play interesting chess and threaten Rybka's hegemony.

Hello Felix..... I believe we've met...... I was banned on your forum for speaking the truth.

I have yet to see the proof from you and your God Vas that IPPOLIT & Co. are clones. Yes, I said the name to your face....... you cannot ban me here, too.

Present the evidence Felix, I am waiting for it. While you can avoid making a fool of yourself by running and hiding, that will hardly continue to brainwash people that IPPOLIT, RobboLito, Iggort, IvanHoe and relatives are clones of your beloved Rybka.

And to remove the doubt, Rybka is based heavily on Fruit. Code was copied. The evidence is here: https://webspace.utexas.edu/zzw57/rtc/eval/eval.html
You have been trying to hide it, to squash it, to deny it, but it is there.

@alpha123: I've allowed your comment because I guess the link you provide is relevant to the discussion, but please watch the language, okay?

we are not in China!

Either we get a proof or this fighting agiainst the freedom of speach and trying to block objective dialog must stop right now!

For sure I wont read any website where freedom of speach is not honored.

Is Felix talking of Vasik who allegedly cloned Fruit , sold it as Rybka and made a decent amount of money from it ?

I am glad to see that I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE here. :)

@goodchess:
What are you worried about? Arne Moll took the most sensible stance not to censor anything. Freedom of speech also means that Felix Kling of the Rybka team is free to give his opinion.

Personally, I agree with test that it's word against word. If Vincent Diepeveen is correct that you don't simply pull a chess engine like this out of a magic hat, then test is correct that the same can be said about Rybka. Some of the new engines may resemble Rybka, but nep makes a good point that the same could be said about Rybka as compared to Fruit. Contrary to Felix Klein's opinion, the legal case doesn't seem clear to me at all. As Ayumi mentions, the question about the legality of reverse engineering has no clear-cut answer. (Is the Rybka team actually accusing the unknown programmers of code stealing or reverse engineering? )

At the end of the day, as an end user, I don't see much reason to condemn without proof. Maybe it's a clear-cut case of 'stealing' from the insider point of view of the Rybka team, but from an independent point of view, I haven't seen any proof. @Felix Klein of the Rybka team: I'm sympathetic towards the efforts of the Rybka team, but please consider the following. All your statements so far may be very objective from your point of view, with your inside information about the Rybka code and so on. For an outsider without this information, your arguments are neither verifiable nor independent.

Well, I found this article very informative. It is good to have these kind of information sources that can't be supressed by rybka team(although I see they had tried to supress some info here, thanks Arne Moll for not allowing that) , a lot of comentaries would have been already removed in some "very importan chess forums"

I'm interested in facts. Up to now, rybka team have not released any proves supporting what they claim to be rybka's clones. On the other hand, the ippolit family has released the codes. And the codes are there for anyone to use and improve these engines.

The onlyone statment that I have seen against ippolit family is that: Well, they're better than rybka, but, who is the author????, their home page seems like a joke, ok, so the onlyone explanation is that they're rybka clones.

That to me is unacceptable. And, by the fact that it's clear that proves from the rybka team are missing (and I think that's because there aren't any) I don't get it why these strong engines are banned from computer tournaments and in places like playchess. Ok, wait a minute, indeed it's very clear! It's all to do with money interest.

So I'll still be using ippolit family engines and firebird also, and spreading the word that all these are clearly stronger than rybka.

@JM

"If Vincent Diepeveen is correct that you don’t simply pull a chess engine like this out of a magic hat"

You mean like Vas did with Rybka 1.0 beta ? pulled it out of a magic hat um.. fruit basket more likely.

This is no different,

Get your strongest chess engine in the world for free now:

http://speedshare.org/download.php?id=4764FD4711
http://www.zshare.net/download/7429917678ad0939/

There is some problem when saying that downloading and using those programs is legal, as I said, even if they provide source code ("open source"), it's still a violation of copyright and the licenses they use can't be applied.

I'm no programmer, but it's obvious that those are no original engines when you use your brain. Why should a serious programmer use fake names? Would a serious programmer investing a lot of time create such a website? Would he act like this?

Additionally Vas stated that those are clones and there's no reason why he should be lying.

I would call myself rather objective in this case, since there's no "official opinion" for the Rybka team and any team member may think and say what he thinks is right. My position in this matter is based on logical thinking and drawing conclusions from facts. I know that people tend to deny reality, but if you think about the whole subject and don't come to the conclusion that this is basically piracy, I would like to hear your arguments. A naive approach like "there has to be a 100% proof by a court" doesn't apply (this way you could use any clone), but if you would provide me with a good, logical reason why the "authors" of those engines use fake names (my first argument), I would most probably change my mind.

Felix Kling => "I’m no programmer, but it’s obvious that those are no original engines when you use your brain."

Question:
Felix please provide evidence as alpha123 has asked , it would really be helpful to use as your an official representative.
Alpha123 has also provided very interesting information about the Rybka's evaluation functions "taken" from fruit.

What is your opinion on this?

Also in your opinion will future Rybka versions use code/ideas from the current Ippolit family, will it perhaps "lend" ideas from Stockfish? since this code is freely available.

And then the think that bothers me most, how would we know? The truth is in the end I might end up buying a finely tweaked stockfish re branded as Rybka 4

This is why it is hard to dispute full disclosure.. show us the code and we will believe you.

"Why should a serious programmer use fake names? Would a serious programmer investing a lot of time create such a website? Would he act like this?"

I myself know lots of open source programmers and many of them use fake names. The reasons vary, but I can say what is a serious job for one person may be just a pastime for another.

In my country a lot of great free/open source software are indeed released by anonymous authors. They are actually working for companies like IBM, Sony etc and don't want to reveal it.

I don't know the exact reason about this case, but I don't mind using software by anon authors at all.

@Felix Kling:
If you say that there is no reason why Vas should be lying makes logically no sense, because he makes money with Rybka and if there is another engine that is better than that and its even free, so why should people buy his product? Its not good for his sells, so of course he would like to see the IPPOLIT engines dead and thats imo the reason he calls them clones, even if there isn´t any reasonable argument that they are Rybka clones...i also don´t see any reason why they should use their original names..they aren´t trying to make money with their engines like Vas does.

You can say but that is not fair because the Rybka team is so hard working and so on...but let´s see it objectively. Since Rybka 3 dominated the market and there wasn´t any competition on the chess engine market, no really progress. It makes sense, because there is no reason for Rybka team to improve their engine as long as its on top because its idea is to make money out of it and it doesn´t make sense to bring a more better programm as long as you can make enough money with that. It´s about milking a cow. So it´s good for the market because there is competition now and maybe finally they will start to improve their rybka engine and bring a better one someday...as IPPOLIT engines are open source i´m sure they will take some ideas out of it, i´m very sure. It´s all about marketing strategy and milking cows that´s what the capitalistic system is about my friends and i think everybody does know that.

Felix, I have a few questions for you:

Why don't Rybka and IPPOLITs have identical/very similar evaluations in most positions??

How did the anonymous authors manage to decompile Rybka 3, make that code compilable (very hard, decompilers definitely don't generate code that can be recompiled immediately) and somehow manage to improve it by ~60 elo in blitz and ~40 elo in long t/c.

I think Vas has mentioned that supporting bishop underpromotion would require several changes to data structures. I assume that the IPPO dudes, with their extremely messy decompiled C code, found those structures and modified them to support BUP?!?! Seriously, have you ever even tried to decompile something as complex as a chess engine and make changes like that?????

On Rybka/Fruit:

Something about Rybka smells fishy... or rather, fruity..... even if Vas only took ideas, the isolated pawn eval in particular I found remarkably similar, plus the passed pawn eval, the piece eval, um, well, pretty much the entire eval. Oh and the inline strtok() in the UCI parser. Vas didn't have to do that. In fact, I can't think of a reason he would. Except, of course, because the UCI parser came from Fruit......
Even if this is all in Rybka 1.0 beta, Dr. Robert Hyatt has mentioned repeatedly that you don't rewrite a program as complex as a chess engine randomly. Crafty 23.2 still has code from Crafty 1.0. I tend to agree with this, unless, of course, Vas tends to lose his source code files and has virtually unlimited free time......

You can download Ivanhoe and tablebases here: http://chess.cygnitec.com

If Mr. Vasik Rajlich and Rybka team ever provide proof that Ippolit >> RobboLito >> Igorrit >> IvanHoe are illegal programs, they will be removed from the server. We've looked at the matter since October 2009 and have yet to see a grain of evidence suggesting these programs are not legal. They are legal to use and distribute.

Franklin

I found some interesting quotes from program authors:

Naum (current # 2 on the CCRL 40/40 Rating List)

Aleksandar Naumov: I work on Naum only at work when I am bored ...

The 1.6 is the first version after 1.2 that I worked hard on (probably 6-8 hours a day while at work :), because I felt that many competing engines are closing in. ...

I usually don't have time to go over Naum's games, because I can't have chess board on my screen at work :) (I work on Naum at home only during vacations) ....

I think that open source programs provide shortcuts to some authors, and I would be happier without them. On the other hand, nothing can replace experience and knowledge you get when you do something yourself rather then just take it from other person's code. You may be able to create a strong engine quickly, but you will never make the top engine that way. Nothing can replace creative thinking. I think a good programmer with chess programming experience shouldn't have any trouble understanding other people's code. I took a quick look only at the search algorithm of the Fruit and Glaurung. Never looked at Phalanx code. Actually I would like to know why is Fruit so damn strong. I didn't see anything special in its search algorithm, so it must be the evaluation. I really have very little interest in other people's code. I have so many ideas of my own that it will take years before I run out of them. I have a great respect for early engine authors (Phalanx, Arasan, Comet and Crafty come to mind). There is so much info about chess programming right now (even without the open source programs) making it much easier to create a strong program.

Stockfish, 3147 ELO, free, open source, current #3 at the CCRL 40/40 Rating List)

Tord Romstad: There are no plans of a commercial Stockfish. Why shouldn't it be free? All three of us have regular jobs which pay our bills; computer chess is just a hobby.

Marco Costalba: People is slowly realizing that opening the sources does not make your engine weaker and if it _could_ make other people's engine stronger the link is not direct nor trivial. Ippo sources are out from almost a year and all the biggest engines have released their new versions _after_ Ippo was out. But still no engine, commercial or not, has reached that level of strength and you can bet _all_ the top engines author have looked at the sources.

http://www.playwitharena.com/
http://www.schach-welt.de/spezial/computerschach-/interviews-/tord-romst...

How long does it takes comment approval????? Or may be I have to edit my comment, can I have it back??? You have may e.mail. Thanks in advance.

There are different ways to get somebodies code besides decompiling. One is just directly breaking in on the computer where the real code is stored. Certainly in big teams it is extremely difficult to avoid leaks to the outside world. Computers get stolen, people are a bit too much open with so called friends,... A disclosure agreement which everybody of the team signs isn't a full guarantee.

@anderson: Only Vas can answer those questions, again, I'm no programmer.

@blueofnoon: In this case writing such an engine would be an incredible amount of work if you would start from scratch. Wouldn't that make it unlikely that the author uses fake names? This can't be compared with little programs.

@KingTal: See my first argument: Why should anyone who has to work like hell to create such a program want to use such childish fake names? Which logical explanation could you offer for this?

@alpha123. Easy. They added quite some stuff to try to obfuscate the cloning, some tables Larry added to Rybka are slightly modified and such things, some algorithms are added, some are removed. It's actually easy to create an engine with totally different output. About the big effort: Well, it's not the first time. See Strelka. About the UCI parser: I'm no programmer, there may be classical examples or not many alternatives for that. However, such things can hardly be considered real inventions of a program. About the evaluation tables: I don't know any details about it. But I don't see why I should trust Mr. Hyatt more than Vas. Afaik Fabien never did such accusations and everything seems fine for him, so even if programmers took stuff from Fruit (and it's clear that all major programmers had a good look at it) I don't see a reason to consider any modern engine a fruit clone. again, I don't know the Rybka sources and the only one who could answer that question is Vas.

Felix Kling: Could you tell Vas that provide some aswers here, due to the fact that it seems tha you can't porvide them for us. Thankyou

Speak your min,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,why you only censor me

@orange.engine: the answer is it takes as long as the time we need to get some sleep!

@Felix: the fake name thing is really quite irrelevant. There are countless reasons why someone wouldn't like to reveal his real name. Privacy is an obvious reason, (lack of) reputation another one. Or someone might just enjoy creating as much confusion as possible. Some of the world's most famous artists from the past have for one reason or another prefered pseudonyms. This has only increased with the arrival of the digital age.

I am equally surprised by your statement that Vas has no reason to be lying. To play devil's advocate: this is of course what the Republicans said about Nixon right before Watergate. In fact, if we follow the logic of some of the commenters on here and on other forums, the fact that Rybka is partly derived from Fruit and that some open source programs are now challenging Rybka's market position seems an excellent reason to lie. Not that I'm saying that this the case, of course, but you can't rule it out because you happen to be on Rybka's side. This is why some concrete evidence would be so helpful. That demand is really quite reasonable, even if it's expressed by persons who lack manners or prefer to stay anonymous.

@Felix Kling:
I don´t understand your "argument". It´s clear that these guys want to express themselves in a humorously and provocating way. They are surely not a company so why use serious names, they probably want to stay anonymous. What´s the problem about that? They don´t need to bring their names as they don´t want to sell a product and make marketing so why need to make it such serious?

You must look at what people are doing and not what they might say, people talk a lot of stuff. I see that they did good engines, the best at moment and i don´t see any proof that this engines are cloned. You or better said Vas is now in the situation to show the evidence of cloning...otherwise your and his words or statements have no weight because this is only empty talking. I´m sorry but i don´t understand why you just can´t show the proof, what´s so hard about that? Then every discussion would disappear and everything would be clear.

@Kingtal

I could not have said it better myself.

@Felix Kling
I really find the "I am no programmer" comments amusing , If your not qualified to comment, then don't

Come on guys. The only way to proof that something is a clone, is to make your own source code open so both codes can be put next to each other and the copied parts can be shown. However opening your own source code means commercially suicide because from then onwards anybody can copy the code very easy. The Rybka team is living from commercialising their product. What you ask is that they give up their own salary just to proof that they are right about the cloning. So showing evidence means an absolute income loss. Not giving evidence probably also means some loss because some people will believe the other party but I expect less revenue loss.
In the end if it concerns here pirats with clones then they achieved in any way their goal by destabillizing the commercial market.

@KingTal (and others): So why did in history of chess engines noone before use fake names besides cloners? Just coincidence? Normally a programmer is quite proud of his work, since writing such a program from scratch is a major achievement. Those reasons you give, like "humour" and so on, are so unlikely.

@Arne: Vas stated that he had a good look at Fruit (like any programmer), but that's a big difference to a clone, since a clone is using another engine as basis and not just taking some ideas and so on.
About Vas lying: Vas never accused engines like Stockfish etc. of being clones, even if they are strong and free etc. . When he said the clone thing about Strelka, the "author" himself admitted it later on. Vas is a honest person.
When you saw how paranoid Vas is with his beta versions (in Manz he used an expensive encrypted USB stick for the latest Rybka) you know that the danger of decompiling Rybka is real.
The current Rybka betas are a major improvement anyway, so Rybka's position was never in danger.

Btw., other teams like the Hiarcs team deal the same way with those clones, they are banned from the major rating lists where experts decide what to test (they don't test clones) and so on. I think at some point believing that all this is a conspiracy, that everything said by the experts is wrong and all this is just done because of Vas being afraid is ridiculous.

@Felix: As far as I'm concerned, the discussion is not about Rybka. It's not about Vas's honesty, which I don't doubt. It's about IPPOLIT/Firebird. Their programmers are accused of piracy, theft and cloning. The engines are banned from various competitions. On some sites, their software can't even be mentioned. These are serious allegations, but what's lacking is evidence to substantiate these accusations. This is the heart of the matter. Serious claims should be backed with serious evidence, not with suspicions or arguments that their behaviour is not like that of other programmers. Is there or is there not a serious case against them? That is the question, and that is how we decide whether using Firebird or similar engines is morally acceptable.

@Brabo: I guess a judge could be the ideal person to whom you could show the evidences without commercial risk

good to see that rajilich is still using felix king as his mouth piece. tell me, when will he get his voice back??

Arne, the only one who can tell you if it's a clone or not is Vas. If he says so, this should be taken as fact. The whole picture together with what Vas says just leaves one reasonable conclusion: it's a clone.

@David:
Some problems pop up if you go to court. Who will you sue to get compensation from because the authors of e.g. Firebird are unknown.
The judge will need assistance to understand how programming is done which leads again to extra risks of keeping the source code closed.
Which judge in which country is valid to give a verdict and can force a penalty to one party.
Finally who will pay for the whole trial except the Rybka-team and even if they win, is it worth the money invested?

Until now I've not seen any proof of credibility of the Firebird team. On the other hand the Rybka-team has earned its stripes over the last couple of years. For me it is not difficult to choose side between somebody hiding himself and somebody reasonable open to everybody.

To me the discussion is more about if chessengines can/ should be protected as an intellectual property. In the 80s Robert Huebner already claimed that the notation sheet should be the intellectuel property of the players. He lost his case so logically some people think the same about chessengines. I think this is wrong.

@Felix Kling

"I’m no programmer, but it’s obvious that those are no original engines when you use your brain."

Right.. And your "non-programmer" brain cannot comprehend the logic of using an alias?

After reading your lengthy nonsense replies, it is so obvious that you are only selecting the comments that you make a counter argument. But after reading all 6 of your comments above, I can only see your "fake name" argument which is totally irrelevant to the chess engines. You cannot address the biggest issue here, which is about showing evidence. Why? Because YOU CANNOT, and NEITHER CAN VAS.

If you, Vas, and the entire "Rybka Religion" are really the "good guys" here, then why is it so difficult for you to prove that? I am pretty sure you are not enjoying this debate that you obviously cannot win, so why don't you just end all these once and for all?

Oh yeah, I completely agree with post above that your comments here are weightless without proof. :)

I have no personal issues against you. I completely understand why you are like that (because you are making money from Rybka). So if I am in a similar position, I'll probably do the exact same thing that you're doing. And I understand the reason why you cannot give us useful information here. Because you don't have any, Vas did not show you any proof too (because he doesn't have any), and all you have is his "honest" words.

:)

"the only one who can tell you if it’s a clone or not is Vas. If he says so, this should be taken as fact. The whole picture together with what Vas says just leaves one reasonable conclusion: it’s a clone."

Wow.. I am truly convinced. :)

HAIL GOD VAS!!! :D

@brabo: Yes, you are right, it is not as easy as I've put it, and to be honest I'm far from being an expert in law, but I'm not sure these problems are the real reason for Rybka not to go to court.
The authors of Firebird are not completely unknown, or at least not that difficult to find. Yes, there is a trial cost but if you win your commercial interests will be protected. It is not worth? well, I don't know ... and I don't think the jurisdiction issue is a real problem.

Another reason for not going to court could be that they could have no evidences that it is a clone, or that they cloned Fruit in the same measure that Firebird cloned Rybka, and they should refute this in order to win the case.

Even though I share your arguments about credibility and about intellectual property I definitely that the court is the only place where Rybka could totally protect its interests.

@David: I think we more or less agree.
So now it is up to every individual chessplayer to decide if he downloads and uses Firebird or not. If you do then you, or believe the credibility of the Firebird team more than the credibility of the Rybka-team (which is besides some exceptions not the case) or you simply don't think high about intellectual property rights when you can take advantage of something (which I believe is likely almost everbody who downloads the program).

I've seen even grandmasters downloading Firebird. Well next time if a book is published by them then I hope that they also don't cry about illegal copies and breaking of intellectual property rights.

Vasik Rajlich can't legally stop the spreading of these programs he don't like unless he has a court order. It's possible to take this to court. Example: Apple sues anonymous people over leak of unreleased Apple product info on Web, though all that hassle is probably not worth it.

The Computer-Chess Wiki has this to say about Ippolit: C source; Win32/64 Linux 32; mp; accused of being a clone but no tangible proof has been offered; There are many forks of the Ippolit codebase; other forks: RobboLito, Igorrit, IvanHoe, FireBird; Latest release: FireBird 1.2

(See Chess Engine List & Clone Engine List)

Of course this is no definite objective proof of anything and we have kind of a reverse situation where it is the accuser who refuses to let anyone look at his source for comparison.

In the FAQ they have an item about clones: ... In particular over the years, more than one engine has being forced out of official tournaments, either because it is proven to be a clone, or on suspicions of being one and refusal to show the source. ... Still you can't ever be sure unless you look at the source. This has obvious problems because the author of the engine might prefer not to let anyone, no matter how trusted, look into his code for fear of losing trade secrets. Would the author of Rybka, Fritz, or Shredder really allow someone, no matter how respected, to look at their source?

@Felix:

"If he says so, this should be taken as fact."

In Holland we say: "that's like the butcher judging his own meat". It means that an interested party is simply not a reliable source of information, even if he happens to be right. This is a basic fact of law, rhetorics and science. That's why we have independant judges, evidence-based trials, peer-review, etc.

The fact that this, well, 'dogma' is the sole basis of a serious accusation is really quite amazing in my opinion, but apparently it's as far as the Rybka team wants to take this. And I guess we should respect that decision as well, even if I personally find it very puzzling.

@Felix

You Said :

“the only one who can tell you if it’s a clone or not is Vas. If he says so, this should be taken as fact. The whole picture together with what Vas says just leaves one reasonable conclusion: it’s a clone.”

I say:

LOL you didn't just say that, please tell me you didn't!! , what incredible skills of deduction you have..

Here is an analogy for you if the "Butcher analogy above by Arne wasn't clear enough for you.

Did you know that "I" make the best apple pie in the world ? Oh no hang on, ill have to wait for the panel of applepie judges to decide.

Now you see, you have to bring ApplePie(tm) judges to decide whether or not ippolit family are clones or not, and using that SAME measuring stick decide if Rybka is indeed a clone or not.

You see.. very simple.. Let the applepie judges do the judging and not the fruitgate insider..

You Felix can't do bad to the hand that feeds you, we get that.

@Felix

You clearly have a conflict of interest on this subject, and there is no reason I should take anything Vas has to say as fact. My reason for not trusting his word is because he has never released the Rybka 3 bug fixes that he promised. I remember he gave his word on that as well.

So why should we trust him exactly?

Felix Kling:
"@alpha123. Easy. They added quite some stuff to try to obfuscate the cloning, some tables Larry added to Rybka are slightly modified and such things, some algorithms are added, some are removed. It’s actually easy to create an engine with totally different output. About the big effort: Well, it’s not the first time. See Strelka. About the UCI parser: I’m no programmer, there may be classical examples or not many alternatives for that. However, such things can hardly be considered real inventions of a program. About the evaluation tables: I don’t know any details about it. But I don’t see why I should trust Mr. Hyatt more than Vas. Afaik Fabien never did such accusations and everything seems fine for him, so even if programmers took stuff from Fruit (and it’s clear that all major programmers had a good look at it) I don’t see a reason to consider any modern engine a fruit clone. again, I don’t know the Rybka sources and the only one who could answer that question is Vas."

"It’s actually easy to create an engine with totally different output."

It's ironic that that argument works well with Fruit/Rybka..... the obfuscated node count and depth.....

"About the big effort: Well, it’s not the first time. See Strelka."

Which was exactly the same strength as Rybka..... and had the same output..... that's how we figured out it was a clone, remember?

"About the UCI parser: I’m no programmer, there may be classical examples or not many alternatives for that."

Um, well, the obvious alternative is to not make it inline. Fruit, as far as I can tell, was the only one to do use it inline.

"However, such things can hardly be considered real inventions of a program."

Agreed, but it was kinda a unique fruity thing.

"But I don’t see why I should trust Mr. Hyatt more than Vas."

ROFL.
The father of modern computer chess vs. the father of modern suspicious chess engine activities.

"I don’t see a reason to consider any modern engine a fruit clone."

Except that a certain modern engine may have Fruit code in it. That would qualify it as a clone, I think.

"again, I don’t know the Rybka sources and the only one who could answer that question is Vas."

So why are you answering it????

I understand the inherent "Catch-22" involved in proving theft of "secret code," that one must expose the secret to prove the theft. In a lawsuit, a court might appoint a Special Master to review such things privately and report his findings to the court. However, it is difficult to file a lawsuit against anonymous persons, and even more difficult to recover damages when they are giving the product away for free.

Still, the burden of proof always lies with the one making the assertion. Saying, "Take my word as fact" just doesn't convince anyone.

Fire Bird far from best of IPPOLIT engines
try this from Angels77
vlado compile plus source file ...free

http://morethanchessagame.forumotion.com/englnes-codes-f3/ivanhoe63mod3a...

find more on her forum
http://morethanchessagame.forumotion.com

inc peter pans latest compile ...the strongest chess engine in the world !!!!

ps naum 4.2 crushes deep rykba3 into 4th place of top chess engines :)

@Felix

You Said :

“the only one who can tell you if it’s a clone or not is Vas. If he says so, this should be taken as fact. The whole picture together with what Vas says just leaves one reasonable conclusion: it’s a clone.”

vlas may be your god , he may even be you , but his word is not sacred and your a muppet if believe only vas can tell if these engines are as you ignorently call "clone"
i suggest you google the word clone and perhaps libel :)

Well what do we really know at this point ? Vas has pointed a finger with no proof. Vas lets face it has gotten lazy and is letting down his user base. He has not come out with his Rybka 3+ for those who have bought 3 from him (like he said he would)....he has not release Rybka 4 ...and blows everyone off at his forum with vague talk...like TBD. Its over a year and a half since he has released anything at all. Seems to me hes too busy with cluster building and is just gonna try to beat other programmers through online machinery.....really more then anything. What should Vas think ? ....everyone is just gonna sit around waiting and waiting? Seems this Ipploit team is busy ...getting us chess fans what we want ...STRONGER ENGINES in a TIMELY fashion. Its been so long since the release of Rybka 3 its nearly a dinosaur and others are catching up bottom line. Just as the Naum auther noted ...he sees other chess engines catching up so hes back to work .....seems Vas as i said has gotten lazy and is just letting his fans down with SLOW work......If its taking Vas a year and a half to come up with something while others are producing new better ....with less bug engines every month or two ....then what has Vas been doing ???? Too worried about cluster and not getting busy taking care of his clients. Rybka 3 has tons of bugs and it just seems he dont really want to spend the time ( again lazy route) to get them their fixes.....then its no wonder this is all happening to him. Less worry about clusters and getting back down to business of getting his customers something new in a timely fashion seems would be in his best interest. Im sure hes honest but ....did he say Rybka 3 owners would get a update ? Has he honored this? Its like take the money and run. Rybka customers are fed up with his delays and lack of updates not to mention not even getting Rybka 4 out after over a year and half of waiting. If others are getting out engines (that are suppose to be clones) every month ...then whats Vas excuse for it being a year and a half. Simple his focus is not on his customers ...its his pet project of this online engine that most could care a less about and in the mean time other programs have caught up and giving chess fans what they really want ....new stronger engines they can use at home. It just doesnt seem hes too worried about getting his customers their new engine ....at this rate ...Rybka 5 will take at least 3 years from the release of 4 ...if ever it comes out......hes just too slow imho. As far as Ipploit family being clones ? I say either PUT UP OR SHUT UP . No disrespect meant in anything i have said here ...just my opinion ...take care chess fans :)

when ippolit should be a clone, then how many percent of rybka are in ippolit? 5 or 10 % ?

how look the analysis output of this position:

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 e5 5.Bxc6 dxc6 6.Nxe5

of fruit, different rybka versions, strelka and ippos ?

Arne Moll: of course, sleeping is a must. Thankyou for you response and I apologize for being impatient.

For providing proves about cloning it's not necesarry to show to everybody the complete original engine's code. In the Strelka issue, proves were provided by Rybka Team.

the rykba team prove nothing they shout loudest in the past now they rely on a few to shout for them
the shouts are drownded out by weep rykbas failures and vas's silence with the tide of non clone engines ..is a super car a clone of a model ford t ?
pick your own analogy if that does not suit you ,,are you a clone of your ancestors because you have a portion of there d.n.a or "compile"
grow up admit the truth , better programers made better engines

I guess Mr. Felix Kling stopped replying because he has nothing more intelligent to say. So lets allow the poor guy weep to his God Vas. :D

@El guest, Ipplolit supporter & some others:

Some of your arguments are interesting but please keep the discussion objective. I don't mind strong opinions but personal attacks on users of this website only make real arguments look weaker so drop them already. Let's set an example that a polite and correct discussion on such a controversial subject is still possible on the internet. Thanks.

ive delivered no "personal comments" that could be concievably fairly interprated as " personal attacks"
i tire of an almost religiose "Blind Faith " arguments when the likes of mr king avoid answereing honestly
they attempt to defend the indefensible and trot out the same tired old platitudes that insult the inteligence of the average moron
but i shall respect your words and we thank you for allowing freedom of speech here :)

Hi guys !

I don't like Rybka !
I don't like Ippo-Robbo-Igorr-Fire-Ivan family !
Why ?
Because they are in a new class of chess engines :
THE SPEED CHESS ENGINES
A minimalistic evaluation , a savage pruning.................all for speed !
I have an impressive chess games collection between the speed chess engines and old , but well ballanced chess engines.Ok , these engines won the matches , but lost also a lot of games despite the great depth and the great KN/s.
Tomorrow , on immortal chess site will be posted some samples.
For analysing my games I use only Hiarcs , Shredder , Gandalf............they are very good & well ballanced chess engines.
Rybka,Robbo.....Ivan....?
Only for fun !

Chaos&Anarchy Freedom

PS: Felix Kling ? Just an youth..............................................................

Ippolit sources were available in internet *before* May 2009. Only the word was spreaded in October 2009. Meanwhile there was lot of time to work on DERIVATIVES, as initial sources (clearly got by a dissasembler program, in opinionn on many from Rybka) were buggy and simply didn't work.

Some say it's possible to successfully disassemble such complex program like Rybka, others say it's not. I can speculate that it's at least extremely difficult and not really worth it as you can't commercialize or play tournaments with a clone without having to prove it's not a clone.

On the chess wiki clone list there are mainly open source programs, but there are also some closed source programs. I assume they know what they are talking about so until somebody convinces me I shouldn't I will accept that it's possible to clone a closed source program. The existence of clones also means that it's easy to falsely accuse, hence without more definite proof I'm on the fence.

hi everybody!
just say : rybka is half dead !
Rajlich don't support it until now, and rybka still be beaten by ipoolit family, that's why i think we will never hear about rybka very soon,
There are so many difference between the 2 engines, size for example, style of play!
Just admit rybka is over if clone or not, if rajlich is wise, just show us the new rybka

@felix kling you just said up above and i quote "Easy. They added quite some stuff to try to obfuscate the cloning, some tables Larry added to Rybka are slightly modified and such things, some algorithms are added, some are removed. It’s actually easy to create an engine with totally different output. " Well if it so easy ..whats Vas excuse for not getting Rybka 3 buyers their update and bug fixes ? If its so easy to make his product better through all these tweaks ...WHY were they NOT done long ago for his customers of Rybka 3? If its so easy ...why is it been a year and half and NO Rybka 4? If its so easy he should be on Rybka 6 by now? If it's so easy why has he done nothing now for so long and is leaving his clients on the fence waiting for their updates that YOU have just claimed are so EASY to do? I dont follow your logic here felix. So EASY yet Vas has produced nothing for a year and half? Felix Vas has gotten too comfortable.....he got paid commercial price for his product and is getting his customers their fixes like its ONLY a HOBBY for him. Like he only gets around to it in his spare time ? Nobody should know his program better then him ....even if hes right that some others are a clone of his.....yet they can FIX all the bugs and increase the strength REGULARLY and he cant get some simple FIXES to his clients of Rybka 3 ? Hes complaining about clones on one hand and STICKING it to his customers on the other hand with no updates ? Hardly the way to keep people happy . IF it so EASY felix as you have said :)

@BTO7

Very well said ...., I agree with everything you stated above!

from Sandi
Sandi
4 ??????

Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 67
Reputation: 12 Add to Sandi's Reputation

??????? ????????????:
???????? ??????
????? ??????: 1

Default Re: IvanHoe
A BILANCE : THE SOURCE IVANHOE 63

Generally were made significant progress in all areas.
As single engine is IvanHoe at least as strong as Robbolito.
In the area dual core,the few tests were also more positive than with the
older sources.
The largest increase was achieved with the most compiles for 4 cores.
More than 80% of Peterpan's POPCNT for i7 and i5 systems destroy Rybka.
One can determine statistically that the average rate against the strongest
opponent is 65-75%!!
On 4 threads IvanHoe pulverized the whole world.
Much better is also the difficult scaling to 8 threads.
Peterpan and Tester have 6 compiles with distinct and constant results against the little fish.
Pity the JR not worked in last time.We should thank him too.
It would be good if the new source IvanHoe 62 improved a little more agressivity.Thus,the draw ratio would fall and the results even more clearly
in all sectors!!

Remember Assassin's Creed 2? I'm definitely not a fan of remote computiong, especially when your net connection is sluggish...

@IanO: I was able to compile Igorrit fine on Mac OS X (after setting correct tool locations in the Makefile to /usr/bin and setting default CPUS_SIZE to 2). So there is indeed a multicore option for the Mac!

I guess you will always have people that don't mind using stolen goods they haven't paid for just like you might someone that finds nothing wrong with buying a stolen Iphone at half price. He can argue that there is no 100% proof that it is stolen since he didn't see the theft, and even if it was then it is not his problem since he did not do the physical act of stealing. It is interesting to see that some are fighting hard to make the Ippolit engines get legitimacy as an original engine, but that ain't gonna happen. There is a very good reason why the authors are anonymous as if the names come out, there will be some names that would indeed be very surprising. Anyone who says that Ippolit is not based on decompiled R3 code is either lying, playing dumb or simply clueless about chess engines.

I am waiting for the return of Kling..... sad that he will not defend Vas in his time of need.....

he prays to his false idol Vas or perhaps to St Jude ..patron Saint of Lost causes

Angels77

A bit of nit-picking. It should be `Vorobyaninov`, not `Vorobyanov`.

@Super Duper

I agree with you on the ethical issue except to say that it is not necessarilly always so simple as you make it out to be. (See my 1st post above.)

About Ippolit you don't really give any arguments to support your position, but then again without solid proof this whole discussion is based on hearsay or speculation anyway.

"There is a very good reason why the authors are anonymous as if the names come out, there will be some names that would indeed be very surprising."

You sound as if you know the names. If you know the names then give them, if you don't know the names then how can you be so sure?

Gotta love the shoot from the hip statements of SuperDave with out a shred of evidence to back his claim and in the mean time Vas has customers with a buggy R3 that have never gotten their fixes. Seems to me ...regardless of the situation Vas has customers paying the price due to his slow work and LACK of attention of his original project R3 ..in favor of project building. Bottom line he figured he was so far ahead of everyone ...he just laid back and blew off ever getting a R3+ out and now all he can do is point fingers at every engine that comes out as strong as his. There is a song for this ..... a little less TALK and a lot more ACTION is whats needed in the Rybka camp.

Super Duper: "Anyone who says that Ippolit is not based on decompiled R3 code is either lying, playing dumb or simply clueless about chess engines."

Alright, tell me why you think it is based on decompiled R3.

BTW, Anyone who says that Ippolit is a modified decompiled R3 is either lying, playing dumb, or simply clueless about decompiling and disassembling and/or computer chess in general.

only a muppet or vas sycophant would liken buying stolen i phone to the debate over the strongest chess engine (IvanHoev63 ) in the world being a rykba 3 clone
do any of these fools understand the meaning of "clone" ..an identical being / product
i ask again is felix king a clone of vas or anyone , one sper + one egg = life and a basis for growth just as fruits code spawned rykba
ivanhoe is about as similar to rykba as felix's old engine is to , he is not a clone of his g g grand parent but has a little of there genes within him

get it now Super Pooper ?

can anyone give a link to the Fire homepage, or at least a link to the page with the latest version?

TIA

Hello everybody,

The think appears clear is that rybka never has time to born, because better engine had exist (like robbolito, and now fire) while rybka was released.
So to conclude, no one is forced to buy chess engine, just progress with those that exist and are free ; stockfish, robbolito and fire.

Great job to fire's team.

Ok, what is the deal with so many comments being completely off topic? Is this an ADHD Forum?