Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify

[Matthias Gemuh]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 21:24:51:


Hello chess fans,
many have proven beyond doubt that Deep9 is a 100% clone of Pepito.
This of course raises some questions:
- will it be eliminated from Leo's tournaments ?
- will ChessterfieldCL promote and Replicant grab play-off ?
or will ChessterfieldCL remain in play-off and one more play-off engine shall qualify?
Regards,
Matthias.
(PS: Deep9(Pepito) is likely to reappear, slightly modified, in next edition of Qualify)

[Johan Hutting]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Johan Hutting at 13 March 2003 22:06:38:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify geschrieben von: / posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 21:24:51:

Hello chess fans,
many have proven beyond doubt that Deep9 is a 100% clone of Pepito.
This of course raises some questions:
- will it be eliminated from Leo's tournaments ?
- will ChessterfieldCL promote and Replicant grab play-off ?
or will ChessterfieldCL remain in play-off and one more play-off engine shall qualify?
Regards,
Matthias.
(PS: Deep9(Pepito) is likely to reappear, slightly modified, in next edition of Qualify)

Where did you get this information?

[Leo Dijksman]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Leo Dijksman at 13 March 2003 22:20:51:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify geschrieben von: / posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 21:24:51:

Hello chess fans,
many have proven beyond doubt that Deep9 is a 100% clone of Pepito.
This of course raises some questions:
- will it be eliminated from Leo's tournaments ?
- will ChessterfieldCL promote and Replicant grab play-off ?
or will ChessterfieldCL remain in play-off and one more play-off engine shall qualify?
Regards,
Matthias.
(PS: Deep9(Pepito) is likely to reappear, slightly modified, in next edition of Qualify)

I have asked Denis for a explaination and the only thing what happend sofar was that the "Deep9" homepage is gone, there will be published a full report (from someone else) if I get no clear answer(s) from Denis!
Yes!
For the moment Replicant is added to the Play-Off (also Chessterfield).
Who said that?????
Leo.


WBEC-Ridderkerk homepage.

[Matthias Gemuh]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 22:33:54:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Re: Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify geschrieben von: / posted by: Leo Dijksman at 13 March 2003 22:20:51:

(PS: Deep9(Pepito) is likely to reappear, slightly modified, in next edition of Qualify)

Who said that?????

[Thomas Mayer]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Thomas Mayer at 13 March 2003 22:49:50:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify geschrieben von: / posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 21:24:51:

Hi folks,
tomorrow I fill publish a comparisson between Pepito 1.59 and Deep on my homepage - you will see that Deep is a 100% clone of Pepito and this Denis Grafen is a liar. Yesterday when I did some first analysis I get really angry, angry about this ugly behaviour of this person. Angry because so many really good testers spent so much time on something totally worthless. Angry because he thought that we are so stupid to believe his lies... Persons like this man destroy the idea of open source - they destroy my belief in new great engines. The more such idiots stand up the more unbelieveness will be behind such great new things like Ruffian or List. That is THEIR achievement.
When I get a little bit cooled down I will show you the collected data on my site - it's better to sleep a night over it... $%&§"!!!! Aaaargh...
Greets, Thomas

[Matthias Gemuh]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 23:50:01:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep - Denis - Gate geschrieben von: / posted by: Thomas Mayer at 13 March 2003 22:49:50:

Hi folks,
tomorrow I fill publish a comparisson between Pepito 1.59 and Deep on my homepage - you will see that Deep is a 100% clone of Pepito and this Denis Grafen is a liar. Yesterday when I did some first analysis I get really angry, angry about this ugly behaviour of this person. Angry because so many really good testers spent so much time on something totally worthless. Angry because he thought that we are so stupid to believe his lies... Persons like this man destroy the idea of open source - they destroy my belief in new great engines. The more such idiots stand up the more unbelieveness will be behind such great new things like Ruffian or List. That is THEIR achievement.
When I get a little bit cooled down I will show you the collected data on my site - it's better to sleep a night over it... $%&§"!!!! Aaaargh...
Greets, Thomas

Hi Thomas,
my distress includes seeing good guys like Leo running lengthy Qualify tournaments, only to realize at the end that their precious time and resources have been wasted by deceivers. Now the Qualify is quite distorted and must be "manually fixed".
As I have hinted, we can expect such want-to-be engine authors to slightly modify the source code of some other strong engine and reappear on the scene again with something "new" and very strong.
I would rather be the author of an original Nero, than of a Ruffian clone.
I wonder where the joy comes from, when cloners watch their clones winning.
Regards,
Matthias.

[Sampson]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Sampson at 14 March 2003 03:25:06:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Re: Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify geschrieben von: / posted by: Leo Dijksman at 13 March 2003 22:20:51:

If he was indeed trying to negotiate with various companies to make Deep9 a
commercial engine he might be in a bit of a legal mess too. Can you spell
F.R.A.U.D. ?

[Telmo]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Telmo at 14 March 2003 05:10:22:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep - Denis - Gate geschrieben von: / posted by: Thomas Mayer at 13 March 2003 22:49:50:

Hi folks,
tomorrow I fill publish a comparisson between Pepito 1.59 and Deep on my homepage - you will see that Deep is a 100% clone of Pepito and this Denis Grafen is a liar. Yesterday when I did some first analysis I get really angry, angry about this ugly behaviour of this person. Angry because so many really good testers spent so much time on something totally worthless. Angry because he thought that we are so stupid to believe his lies... Persons like this man destroy the idea of open source - they destroy my belief in new great engines. The more such idiots stand up the more unbelieveness will be behind such great new things like Ruffian or List. That is THEIR achievement.
When I get a little bit cooled down I will show you the collected data on my site - it's better to sleep a night over it... $%&§"!!!! Aaaargh...
Greets, Thomas

Please don't dismay! Only a handful of frauds have been reported so far- meanwhile more than one hundred real engines are freely available, all of them interesting and useful. And this is just the beginning. Open source has been a phenomenal success.
Telmo

[Telmo]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Telmo at 14 March 2003 05:32:25:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Re: Deep - Denis - Gate geschrieben von: / posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 23:50:01:

I would rather be the author of an original Nero, than of a Ruffian clone.
I wonder where the joy comes from, when cloners watch their clones winning.
Regards,
Matthias.

Another example of patology is the following: in yahoo chess there is an individual (he uses a vulgar nickname) who invites you to play games at 15/11111.
That is, 15 minutes with 11111 seconds increment. This means more than three hours of increment for move. Of course this setup is absurd, but some people -I have been one of them-, accostumed to play 15/0 or the like, seeing "11 minutes" accept readily the challenge prior to realize the setup doesn't make sense.
You might guess what happens then: you make a move, but he never replies. After fifty or twenty minutes, of course, you get bored and resign- then your "adversary" fattens his rating. He doesn't play, he just want to get points without playing.
It seems that this troubled individual is making this fraud simulteously at several rooms. Indeed I suspect he's using more than a computer for this.
Imagine that. It's incredible how void may be a human life.
Telmo

[Uri Blass]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Uri Blass at 14 March 2003 09:25:54:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep - Denis - Gate geschrieben von: / posted by: Thomas Mayer at 13 March 2003 22:49:50:

Hi folks,
tomorrow I fill publish a comparisson between Pepito 1.59 and Deep on my homepage - you will see that Deep is a 100% clone of Pepito and this Denis Grafen is a liar.

Only one question.
Did Denis claim that the source code of Deep9 is not the same or almost the same as another program with a differet name?
I remember a discussion from the chess computer club when the author simply did not reply to the accusation that Deep9 has to be a clone of another program and only gave a link to a table with results of Deep9.
My opinion is that giving a program X to testers and calling it in name Y without explaining that X=Y is worse than most cases of lying but it is not lying.
Uri

[Jose Carlos]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Jose Carlos at 14 March 2003 09:28:17:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Re: Deep - Denis - Gate geschrieben von: / posted by: Uri Blass at 14 March 2003 09:25:54:

Hi folks,
tomorrow I fill publish a comparisson between Pepito 1.59 and Deep on my homepage - you will see that Deep is a 100% clone of Pepito and this Denis Grafen is a liar.

Only one question.
Did Denis claim that the source code of Deep9 is not the same or almost the same as another program with a differet name?
I remember a discussion from the chess computer club when the author simply did not reply to the accusation that Deep9 has to be a clone of another program and only gave a link to a table with results of Deep9.
My opinion is that giving a program X to testers and calling it in name Y without explaining that X=Y is worse than most cases of lying but it is not lying.
Uri

I kind of agree. It is a fraud, which is worse than a lie.
José C.

[Albert Bertilsson]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Albert Bertilsson at 14 March 2003 09:38:50:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Deep9, Pepito and Leo's Qualify geschrieben von: / posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 13 March 2003 21:24:51:

Hi!
First of all I have to say that I whould like to cut the head of this "wanna be a programmer". It's guys like him who calls themselves programmers, but really aren't that makes the whole software industry bad (failed projects, buggy software) I've seen a ton of this and I hate them all. There should two titles for software producers copying-programmers and creating-programmers.
But that wasn't the reason for writing this post, now the reason is a question:
Why did he (the author) do this? If he copies a source (makes some changes) and then releases a "fake" engine it will be obvious very soon indeed, because there will never be an improved version (because he can't improve it (except for perhaps copying another stronger engine). Soo what did he expect to achive by this? 20 days of glory and applause?
To all authors of chess engines (espicially the week ones (that includes me too)) keep on struggling, it's the only way to learn something new, make your engine better and eventually become a better programmer.
/Regards Albert

[Michael]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Michael at 14 March 2003 09:58:50:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Re: Deep - Denis - Gate geschrieben von: / posted by: Telmo at 14 March 2003 05:32:25:

That's why there are sites like freechess.org. Yahoo is not much fun because of the inc quiters. Seen it in other games too like checkers. At least on freechess you can had a game adjudicated after a week. Still think a lot of the human players are computers with a secretary to key in the moves. LOL use inc = 0 to screen them out.

[Matthias Gemuh]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Matthias Gemuh at 14 March 2003 11:33:43:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Re: Deep9, Pepito wouldn't it become obvious anyway? geschrieben von: / posted by: Albert Bertilsson at 14 March 2003 09:38:50:

Why did he (the author) do this? If he copies a source (makes some changes) and then releases a "fake" engine it will be obvious very soon indeed, because there will never be an improved version (because he can't improve it (except for perhaps copying another stronger engine). Soo what did he expect to achive by this? 20 days of glory and applause?

Hi Albert,
we certainly would have had improved versions of Deep9
(each time Pepito was improved ).
/Matthias