I'm not convinced about that concept, tbh. People put a lot of work to optimize their bots, include GPU usage and figure out, how to use Pondering the best way. And then you want those programmers to remove those features and put work into making their bots run on your system, just to "level the playing field".
2015-01-14 3:04 GMT+01:00 Chris LaRose <cjlar...@gmail.com>: > Thanks everyone for all the feedback! Sorry I hijacked the thread! > > There are definitely some big pros and cons to a hosted, containerized > environment for Go bots. I've replied to some comments below: > > Won’t hosting limit your usability? With cgos I can build and immediately >> test on cgos on my development machine. With your service, how do I get my >> new executable to run? > > > You're absolutely right. The workflow for developers will have some > additional overhead. The nice thing, though, is that Docker is very good at > providing a way for an application to run virtually anywhere in a > consistent fashion. That is, if you can get your bot running in a Docker > container on your own machine, then it's pretty likely that it'll run on > Baduk.io's Docker host without a hitch. > > If my engine uses a GPU or is a multinode cluster, how does that run on >> your docker service? > > > Right now, I don't have plans for supporting such bots. But as Urban > Hafner replied, it puts everyone on a level playing field--all bots have > access to the same exact resources. As some have noted, maybe that means > Baduk.io wouldn't serve the same purpose as CGOS. That's fine by me. > > At first, I want Baduk.io to be a place where players, especially > beginners can get a few games in against bots. Because the bots are hosted, > I'm not limited in the number of simultaneous games I can play against one > bot. As far as I understand it, it GNU Go is playing against five different > people on KGS, that means that there are five different instances of GNU Go > running on people's machines someone in the world. If someone else wants to > play, they can't. Also, bots that aren't currently playing a game can be > terminated and won't consume resources. Starting and stopping containers is > so fast that I can afford to only start bots immediately after its opponent > plays, request a single move, and terminate it. > > Anyway, Baduk.io is largely only a proof-of-concept right now--I'll have > to post a message to the list when I get a little further working on it. > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Joshua Shriver <jshri...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> If you can send me a binary that would be greatly appreciated. Trying >> to build some anchors now. >> >> -Josh >> >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Hideki Kato <hideki_ka...@ybb.ne.jp> >> wrote: >> > Shilver, >> > >> > I'll be able to run FatMan1, the anchor for 9x9, on my site, if >> > necessary. Or, it's also possible to send you its binary and password >> > so that you can run it on your site. >> > >> > Hideki >> > >> > Joshua Shriver: <CAEdmgvYkFd-tDGL7TxYd55_bWpNBK4gk_VLBNHpWto= >> xwb5...@mail.gmail.com>: >> >>I'll try and get CGOS back online before this weekend. Technically it >> >>should be running now, but there were several issues. In order to use >> >>it now you take the cgos client for your architecture and you have >> >>to specify cgos.computergo.org manually since the binaries are >> >>hardcoded to the old boardspace address. I've had some troubles >> >>unbundling the binaries and rebuilding the executables with TCL. >> >> >> >>Rankings are also an issue as well which is something I'll have to >> >>change in the code to make sure anchors and their predefined ELO >> >>ratings are used. >> >> >> >>Will try and make a better write-up on how to connect. Hopefully this >> >>weekend I should have the anchors running 24/7 and some people can try >> >>connecting. >> >> >> >>I'll flush the old data and in terms of games and we'll start with a >> >>fresh slate. Though all the data even from years past are still >> >>available though for historic reasons and for anyone who wants the >> >>SGF's. >> >> >> >>-Josh >> >> >> >>On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 5:47 AM, folkert <folk...@vanheusden.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> I have the feeling that cgos won't come back in even the distant >> future >> >>> so I was wondering if there are any alternatives? >> >>> E.g. a server that constantly lets go engines play against each other >> >>> and then determines an elo rating for them. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Folkert van Heusden >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Afraid of irssi? Scared of bitchx? Does xchat gives you bad shivers? >> >>> In all these cases take a look at http://www.vanheusden.com/fi/ maybe >> >>> even try it or use it for all your day-to-day IRC conversations! >> >>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Computer-go mailing list >> >>> Computer-go@computer-go.org >> >>> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>Computer-go mailing list >> >>Computer-go@computer-go.org >> >>http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > -- >> > Hideki Kato <mailto:hideki_ka...@ybb.ne.jp> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Computer-go mailing list >> > Computer-go@computer-go.org >> > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> Computer-go@computer-go.org >> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > Computer-go@computer-go.org > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
