Originally posted by Steve Exeterseems to me that PCs used to come with GnuChess installed by Microsoft or by the vendor .... probably under Windows 3.1 ...
I was resigned to the fact that Russ had detected GNU Chess on my PC (through whatever method) and that because of the prima facie evidence had no choice but to ban me for the integrity of the site.
If you're all so convinced that those methods of detection are not being employed then I am at a total loss as to why after 2 years of not spectacularly good or consistent play I was banned.
I don't intend to stay here after today.
Originally posted by arrakisthere's a "no WMDs?" thread on Debates that discusses that ...
Hmmm... kinda like the Republicans telling the people that there are more jobs now then when Clinton was president!
Or George Bush telling Americans that the war in Iraq is a war against terror - using lies and misinterpretations to support his theme. ðŸ˜
1 edit
Originally posted by Steve ExeterI have to divulge some information here as a former Buster for ICC. There became a point where it was necessary for the writers of on-line chess engines to insert backdoor software that would allow chess sites to determine if their chess software was active.
Yes, I work in IT and my PC is free of Spyware. I've tried to find what methods Russ is using. I am convinced it's not Spyware but a legitmate functionality in Winboard that can be exploited.
Note that this test determines the program is active and running in memory - it doesn't prove the person is using it; but the general thinking is that if the program is active and running in memory AND the next move (or series of moves) match that of the active engine, THEN this is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the player was using the engine".
I can't give you the information that is used to ping these programs... if I did then cheaters would find a way to stop this test. Besides, I'm sure these codes have changed since I was in the buster business. But I assure you, they ARE THERE!
Now then, even though this "test" is available, from what I've been told RHP can't use it because the site is set up in a manner that would not allow a "ping" to the user. So I don't know what the moderators are looking at. Maybe there's a way to activate the software to make this happen and maybe there isn't.
It just seems strange to me that Exy had Winboard open and was nailed for using that engine.
Originally posted by arrakisHe wasn't nailed for using 'that' engine. He was banned for using an engine. Winboard isn't even an engine! It can be used as a graphical interface for any number of engines.
I have to divulge some information here as a former Buster for ICC. There became a point where it was [b]necessary for the writers of on-line chess engines to insert backdoor software that would allow chess sites to determine if their chess software was active.
Note that this test determines the program is active and running in memory - it doesn't pr ...[text shortened]...
It just seems strange to me that Exy had Winboard open and was nailed for using that engine.[/b]
90% of the time I'm playing on RHP I have Chessbase open in the background. I use it to access databases and opening books and move pieces around. I could use it to run an engine as well if I so wished.
Now, when playing classical chess the things I use Chessbase for aren't permitted. Perhaps then something could be said if it was detected in the background. On RHP however nothing can be said at all.
This brings up another point, these 'backdoors' installed in all chess programs. Many interfaces (Winboard included) are open source. You can view the source code for yourself. Yet, somehow these have backdoors installed in them. Backdoors that manage to recieve and send data without triggering a firewall such as Zonealarm with program control set. Something seems wrong here.
Playchess.com can tell if you are using engines in the background because the program you download to play on the server checks for changes of focus and specific programs. It then warns you and if it continues you are kicked and ratings reset.
You know, you often seem to be in a situation of claiming large amounts of knowledge and in the same post showing a complete lack of it.
Originally posted by shavixmirDatabase use and opening books are allowed by the ToS of the site. They help me improve my game.
Why???
I use the interface to move pieces around as it's much better than the analyse board feature of the site which is severely lacking (promotion, en passant, no ability to play back variation etc.).
Originally posted by XanthosNZMaybe you found 47...Kf4 and maybe you didn't...
If there was some way of playing a classical OTB game against you I would. While I've grown to love my databases and opening books during my time on RHP I can still play without them.
We've played two games on RHP, neither of which was won in the opening.
The Dragon game is a line I don't need databases for as it's one of my favourites. It led t ...[text shortened]... ame due to opening database use. That makes a whole lot of sense.
In conclusion, sour grapes.
I look forward to an encounter with you OTB. I'll be playing in the North American Open in Las Vegas, Dec 26-29th. Hope to see you there! 😵
1 edit
Originally posted by arrakisIs that an accusation that I cheated in that game, or any game for that matter? I can give my aftergame analysis if you want it.
Maybe you found 47...Kf4 and maybe you didn't...
I look forward to an encounter with you OTB. I'll be playing in the North American Open in Las Vegas, Dec 26-29th. Hope to see you there! 😵
Also, are my username and flag not clear enough? I live in New Zealand. Of course I won't be at the NAO. I thought about entering the New Zealand Open in January but accomodation in Queenstown is too expensive.
Originally posted by XanthosNZWhat!? I gotta fly to New Zealand to find you!?? 🙂
Is that an accusation that I cheated in that game, or any game for that matter? I can give my aftergame analysis if you want it.
Also, are my username and flag not clear enough? I live in New Zealand. Of course I won't be at the NAO. I thought about entering the New Zealand Open in January but accomodation in Queenstown is too expensive.
1 edit
Originally posted by arrakisHe's right though. First you claim that you would beat me if I didn't use databases. Looking at either of the games we played shows that isn't right. Then you try to claim that I cheated to beat you.
You don't even belong in this conversation.
I made 35 unique moves in the Dragon game I mentioned. Fritz agrees with 28 of those. However 9 of those moves give a two or more pawn advantage over the second choice move. 6 more are between one or two pawns better than the second choice.
Most of my matchups came in the series of moves following 14. Rxc3, which as I said in a game message I spent a very long time on (upwards of two hours) with a real board (and even in the middle of that Fritz finds 19. ... d5 as a half pawn improvement 😞, it also found I missed a number of the best continuations for white when working out the variations, but then so did you), and the last 8 moves or so which basically consisted of removing defenders and pushing pawns.
As I said before, you threw an even game away with 37. Nf3, don't blame me for that. I wasn't going to mention it, but because of your complete lack of sportsmanship I will, your draw offer on move 41 made me laugh. 5 moves earlier and I would have accepted.
PS. If you want to play me OTB then yes you would have to come to New Zealand. I've been to the US in the last few years and have no real desire to go back.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderI agree.
If the best evidence is a player matching up to an engine, if the games are public and if the engines are available commercially or as freeware (all of which are seemingly) true, then why don't you simply post some game analyses supporting a player's banning. Surely if it's "overwhelming evidence" that will be obvious.
One of the things that worries me about this entire conversation is that the Game Mods may lack the reasoning skills to properly assess what should be confidential and what doesn't have to be.
I don't mean a personal attack by that statement. I'm really saying that a very LARGE proportion of people don't have those skills. It's a legal reasoning type of issue and like it or not, there's a reason why law continues to be a specialist profession.
I'm reminded of the way the media reports on court cases sometimes. They're aware that they shouldn't presume a person to be guilty, so they use the word "alleged". Often, however, they use it indiscriminately. I've heard a TV reporter talk about someone who has been hacked into pieces as being "allegedly murdered". It's quite obvious that the fact they were murdered is not in issue, what's in issue is WHO did it.
So, everything is "alleged" out of an abundance of caution. I can't help thinking that the Game Mods are marking everything "confidential" out of an abundance of caution.
Many of your probably won't like this post. So shoot me.
2 edits
Originally posted by XanthosNZWell said! [re; the arrakis post on page 3O]
You know, you often seem to be in a situation of claiming large amounts of knowledge and in the same post showing a complete lack of it.
Isn't there some law against accessing someone elses computer remotely, without their permission.
Highly unlikely for a proper commercial site like this to risk breaking any laws like that wouldn't you think? Even if they could find a way to do so....which they couldn't on mine unless I allowed them.
It must be awfully tempting for people who have them to have a quick look at the engines recommendation if it's just a click away.
31
Originally posted by no1marauderAgreed; and I also agree that IF the mods are relying on game analysis, a lot of people would feel more comfortable if more evidence was forthcoming.
On that question, yes but I've never believed for a minute that Russ would use spyware. The question originally asked of Gatecrasher was never really answered, however.