Christian Athon wrote : >Yes, and likely zbot will have an advantage here, since from what I >have read, the zbot net is developed to be more human like, that is, >you can ask questions do you understand this position, is it >volatile...
That's an exemple of the fact that different people may have similar idea at the same time. Not long ago (May 2nd 2006) I wrote this to the mailing list (you can find it in the archives) : >I may be a dreamer but I've been wondering for a while if it was possible >to extract useful information from the eval window data (not knowing it's >crappy at the moment). > >I mean something like : move #1 is better than move #2 because of the race, >or because of the gammon chances, or because of it keeps the contact, etc. > >This corresponds to pull out some qualitative information from the neural >net outputs ... not really easy I suppose, but this would be the ultimate >learning tool ... a tool that explains you why you suck (instead of just >telling you that you suck) :)) I swear : - I don't read GoL - I wasn't aware of zbot plans (not even of the project existence) I'm also sure I'm not the only one who has ever been thinking about that, hence I wouldn't complain if Snowie guys (for example) "pick up" the idea for Snowie 5 (or 6). Concerning contributing to gnubg and not getting credited, I never experienced something similar : personally, I think I'm even getting too much credit for pointing out a few bugs here and there and building Win distribs. Finally, as a general advice, if anybody thinks he owns a great idea that will make it into a commercial product, talking about it on any forum/mailing list is not a good idea. MaX. _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
