DailyDirt: Help Me, Software, You're Our Only Hope...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Everyone relies on software nowadays -- sometimes without even realizing it. But when an entire airline shuts down due to a computer outage, our dependence on technology becomes obvious. (And Skynet is simply reminding us who is really in charge.) Here are a few links on software projects that humans might want to keep an eye on. By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good Techdirt articles, too.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: chess, david brin, rybka, skynet, software
Companies: international computer games association


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread


  1. identicon
    Rekrul, 29 Jun 2011 @ 7:07pm

    The world's best chess software has been caught cheating (because its human author copied from open source chess programs). Sorry, Rybka, the International Computer Games Association (ICGA) says you can't play anymore.

    The headline makes it sound as if the chess program cheated. It's claimed that the author of the program cheated by using code from other chess programs. The program itself doesn't cheat.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. icon
    Greevar (profile), 29 Jun 2011 @ 7:13pm

    Sore losers. He built a better chess program.

    Just because they didn't get to see the source code and it performs similarly to Fruit and Crafty, they automatically assume that it was taken from those two programs? Could Rajlick not have developed his similar algorithms independently by studying the competition and find his own way to incorporate them? Besides that, it seems Rybka was doing it better since it beat everyone else. I think these people are stuck on the illusion that two people can't come up with the same idea and just assumed he "stole" it. If he's truly genuine, then this is just cruel and damaging to an innovative programmer.

    If he did just simply use their code, then he should give credit, lose his current winnings and be disqualified, but since nobody is allowed to look at it, we can't know for sure. That's certainly not a justification to call him a cheat and take away his winnings retroactively. That's just being petty. "We think you're plagiarizing, but we can't prove it; so we'll just judge you with ambiguous evidence instead." People can be so possessive of ideas and, when threatened, will act indignantly towards those that come to similar discoveries independently.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. icon
    Michael Ho (profile), 30 Jun 2011 @ 12:39am

    Re: Sore losers. He built a better chess program.

    Greevar,

    It seems like the author has the option of revealing his source code to the contest judges.. but isn't doing so. Maybe Rajlick didn't plagiarize -- but if he didn't, then revealing his source code would certainly put these accusations to rest, no?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    A Guy, 30 Jun 2011 @ 2:57am

    Critical systems shouldn't rely on an operating system to run. Software may be helpful for creating logs, monitoring, and communications with offsite locations but an airplane or should NEVER be designed so that it will stop functioning if a program throws an unhandled exception.

    I find xkcd is often right about these things:
    http://xkcd.com/463/

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    A Guy, 30 Jun 2011 @ 3:02am

    Re:

    That should read airplanes or insert your --critical system here--.

    Apparently techdirt doesn't like some characters.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. icon
    Marcel Popescu (profile), 1 Jul 2011 @ 6:24am

    My problem with proof of correctness...

    ... is that you can easily prove that a program calculating the average of two numbers, a and b, by doing

    result = (a + b) / 2

    is correct. And then you run the program and it works, until a year later someone sets a and b to very large values, and the program crashes (or returns a negative value). That's why I prefer testing to proofs, even though I agree that proofs are theoretically better.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. icon
    Greevar (profile), 1 Jul 2011 @ 9:06am

    Re: Re: Sore losers. He built a better chess program.

    That's like letting the cops search your house to prove you're not a criminal. It's the old assumption that if you've done nothing wrong, then you have no reason to bar them from looking. Yet, he does. He worked on that software and probably doesn't want other people snooping around his code as it would expose his work to people he probably competes with. I have the right to not have others poking their nose in my personal privacy based solely on the accusation of my wrongdoing and demand a search for evidence to the effect. So does this programmer.

    They merely suspect he was cheating and want to breach his privacy to find the evidence that they obviously don't have to support that accusation. They're assuming guilt and demanding he prove his innocence. Since he didn't comply, they automatically assume he cheated and responded as such. We may be a country that believes in "innocent until proven guilty" when it applies to criminal law, but we are very much still of the mentality of "guilty until proven innocent" outside of a courtroom. That's just sad.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8. icon
    Michael Ho (profile), 1 Jul 2011 @ 9:14am

    Re: My problem with proof of correctness...

    Presumably, this crash-proof software tries to test various inputs that might cause invalid output...? So it's not just a "theoretical test" but automated testing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9. icon
    Michael Ho (profile), 1 Jul 2011 @ 9:22am

    Re: Re: Re: Sore losers. He built a better chess program.

    Greevar,

    He entered a contest with a prize... I'd expect the judges to be able to view his source code as part of the rules, but maybe that wasn't explicitly stated. In any case, a non-disclosure agreement would solve this problem by allowing only a limited number of people to see his code to verify the absence of plagiarism.

    On the other hand, I do agree that it seems wrong for the judges to award a prize and then try to take it back without solid justification.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat

Warning: include(/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_promo_discord_chat.inc): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_module_promo.inc on line 8

Warning: include(): Failed opening '/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_promo_discord_chat.inc' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/share/pear:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/..') in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_module_promo.inc on line 8

Warning: include(/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_promo_jq_chat.inc): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_module_promo.inc on line 8

Warning: include(): Failed opening '/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_promo_jq_chat.inc' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/share/pear:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/..') in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/rc_module_promo.inc on line 8
Recent Stories
.

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.