Angels_77 2 minutes ago
re the belief that Rajlich has lost the source code that would either completely clear him or convict him. That belief may stem from a number of claims that he has made, such as the one below this comment:
“By Vasik Rajlich Date 2012-01-08 20:30
I don't have any Rybka source code from before the spring of 2010
Unfortunately for Rajlich, In the post below, from August 2011, Cimiotti states that he discussed with Rajlich whether the code should be given to ICGA. The point is that Rajlich is discussing with Cimiotti whether or not to release to the ICGA code that Rajlich claims no longer exists.
“- N/- By Lukas Cimiotti (*) [de] Date 2011-08-14 10:28
Vas and I discussed whether or not he should give source code to the ICGA.
K I Hyams to ed schrodder
If R1-R3 are lost, can you come up with an explanation for the reason why Cimiotti and Rajlich were discussing whether or not they should hand over the "non existent" code to the ICGA?
Lukas wrote:
- N/- By Lukas Cimiotti (*) [de] Date 2011-08-14 10:28
Vas and I discussed whether or not he should give source code to the ICGA. He really didn't like that idea. My idea was removing all comments and maybe changing all names of variables to make the code harder to understand. But as the guys that disassembled Rybka hadn't understood several parts of the code, we agreed it's safer to not give anything to our competitors.
So Vas only defended himself by saying: I did nothing wrong.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]~~~
Oh dear , bad memory = poor liar
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
_________________
nothing is ever truly lost , just misplaced and awaiting us
