AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches • Hacker News Board

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#371

Post by seren » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:01 PM UTC

clickok wrote: post #46

I posted in the earlier thread because this one wasn't up yet[1]. Some quick observations 1. AlphaGo underwent a substantial amount of improvement since October, apparently. The idea that it could go from mid-level professional to world class in a matter of months is kinda shocking. Once you find an approach that works, progress is fairly rapid. 2. I don't play Go, and so it was perhaps unsurprising that I didn't rea…

Regarding 2, the point is that a valid move in Go is to put a stone everywhere on an empty position each turn on 19x19 grid. So the number of valid move is not comparable at all with Chess.

You can check for more information : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_and_mathematics

From these two links, the game tree complexity of chess is estimated at 10^120 while for Go it is 10^700.

Not really in the same ballpark.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#372

Post by dmoy » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:02 PM UTC

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #320

jonah wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was live streamed and the archive is now up on The Official AGA Youtube Channel at: AlphaGo ?p vs Lee Sedol 9p, 0400 UTC (8pm PST)[1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZugVil2v4w

Thanks for the link. Myungwan Kim's commentary is superb, am I the only one thinking the american guy speaks a bit too much though?

Andrew is an awesome polite guy, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he was doing the right thing there.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#373

Post by hosh » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:05 PM UTC

exDM69 wrote: post #186

taneq wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a proof-of-concept. What they've proved is that the same kind of intelligence required to play Go can be implemented with computer hardware. Before now, software couldn't beat a ranked human player at Go no matter how much computing power we threw at it . Now we can. Give it ten years and, between algorithmic optimizations and advances in processing, you'll have an unbeatable Go app on your phone.

> Give it ten years and, between algorithmic optimizations and advances in processing, you'll have an unbeatable Go app on your phone. I find this overly optimistic because of the huge amount of power required to run the Go application. Remember, we're getting closer and closer to the theoretical lower limit in the size of silicon chips, which is around 4nm (that's about a dozen silicon atoms). That's a 3-4x improvem…

You're right, it won't be a general purpose computing device the way we conceive of it with the von Neumon architecture.

It'll likely be hardware that can be generalized to run any kind of deep net. The iPhone 5S is already capable of running some deep nets.

As a friend mentioned, it isn't the running of the net, it's the training that takes a lot more computational power (leaving aside data normalization). A handheld device that is not only capable of running a deep net, but also training one -- yeah, that will be the day.

There are non von Neuman architectures that are capable of this. Someone had figured out how to build general-purpose CPUs on silicon made for memory. You can shrink down a full rack of computers down into a single mother board, and use less wattage while you are at it.

This really isn't about having a phone be able to beat a Go player. Go is a transformative game that, when learned, it teaches the player how to think strategically. There is value for a human to learn Go, but this is no longer about being able to be the best player in the absolute sense. Go will undergo the same transformation that martial arts in China and Japan has gone through with the proliferation and use of guns in warfare.

Rather, what we're really talking about is a shot at having AIs do things that we never thought they could do -- handle ambiguity. What I think we will see is -- not the replacement of blue collar workers by robots -- but the replacement of white collar workers by deep nets. Coupled with the problems in the US educational system (optimizing towards passing tests rather than critical thinking, handling ambiguity, and making decisions in face of uncertainty), we're on a verge of some very interesting times.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#374

Post by Eliezer » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:13 PM UTC

wrsh07 wrote: post #341

Eliezer wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[Citation needed.] I for one did not say to not worry, and I bet $1500 vs. $2250 on Sedol winning the match before getting cold feet and arbing my outstanding bets down to $400 vs. $700.

Can't you just look at the creators of the program? Demis says he certainly does not worry about a "terminator" or "ex machina" style scenario and also predicted they would win: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34266425 Beyond that, it seems reasonable to call for discussion about how AI is used [as he also does in that article].

That is NOT Demis saying not to worry, it's him saying the Terminator movie is a bad model.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#375

Post by laxatives » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

sounds wrote: post #356

kolinko wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a person who knew only the basic rules beforehand, I wouldn't imagine it any better. Any more complicated and I'd get lost. I'd love to see one day a live commentary, with an extra window showing what computer is thinking at the moment.

Having worked on some code very similar to this, showing the computer's best moves would be quite artificial. Here's some thoughts as to why that is: 1. The computer can discard all its current best ideas and flip through new ones so fast, it would be a flickering blur to humans. 2. Even if we put a speed limit on it, the move being considered is itself the result of considering a lot of slight variations. 3. The abi…

Regarding the first one, I don't think this would be a serious issue. It shouldn't show what move its considering, just the current best option. It would probably converge on a good move within the first second. Running the free, quick analysis from chess.com on my Iphone has a great visualization that rapidly updates the computer's scoring of the current position and shows what it thinks is the best move, as well as pointing out any previous moves it thinks are mistakes/blunders.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#376

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:24 PM UTC

peteretep wrote: post #246

exDM69 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do elaborate. I try to base my assumptions (which I accept may turn out to be completely wrong) on physics and experience in working in semiconductors. I just don't see a 1000x+ decrease in the power required happening in a decade or two without some revolutionary technology I can't even imagine. Is this what you meant? I'm sure most people couldn't imagine modern silicon chips in the 1950s vacuum tube era. Bu…

> physics and experience in working in semiconductors > without some revolutionary technology I can't even > imagine I suspect (in the nicest possible way) that in a lineup of your imagination (on current assumptions) vs the combined ingenuiety of the human race driven by the hidden hand, the latter wins.

It seems to me that the people who say "it won't happen" do tend to have a much better reason to say it won't happen (or rather that it _probably_ won't happen) than the people who insist the next big revolution is just round the corner just because the last big revolution did happen.

The optimistic position is a bit like saying: "I 've lived 113 years, I'm not going to die now!". It's entirely possible for a trend to reverse itself. If machine learning has taught us something is that background knowledge (in this case, of processor technology) gives you much better results than just guessing based on what happened in the past.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#377

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #289

afc wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks like a good example of the Normalcy bias logical fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias That previous constraints have been beaten in no way supports the argument that we will beat the laws of physics this time.

The previous problems were solved because people were willing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to solve them. And they are still spending that kinds of money. If the normalcy bias was in effect, they wouldn't be spending that money.

People have probably spent billions of dollars to find a cure for cancer, but there isn't one that works for all cancers and most are still very bad news.

Say you spent a hundred billion dollars to extinguish the sun- that wouldn't work. How much money you spend is irrelevant when you're up against what people call "hard physical limits".

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#378

Post by apetresc » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

goldenkey wrote: post #233

mijoharas wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been finding it pretty unwatcheable. Does anyone know of a version that doesn't have the technical issues? (I'm very happy with the commentary, but the video keeps cutting to this 0 minutes screen and audio is patchy).

Same the "game will start in 0 seconds" thing kept cutting the audio in and out, and obstructing the board footage. Terrible for an uploaded youtube clip. I can understand issues with the live stream. But it's already over. Couldn't someone have edited that out?

Those technical issues were only a problem a few times at the beginning of the broadcast. 99% of the footage is fine, just stick with it. The problems disappear.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#379

Post by interskh » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

mathgenius wrote: post #148

interskh wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lee had quite a bit of advantages in the middle then he made one bad mistake and that was it. Deepmind made some smaller mistakes too but not as bad. I am really excited about the Deepmind though. Looking forward to tomorrow's game!

What was the mistake that Lee made? EDIT: good postmortem here https://gogameguru.com/alphago-defeats-lee-sedol-game-1/

Yeah. It was the bottom right corner that I talked about. But some speculation says it was part of AlphaGo's plan so I am extremely looking forward to today's game now.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#380

Post by apetresc » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 5:33 PM UTC

ktRolster wrote: post #18

conanbatt wrote: post #11

This not only shows the insane advances in computer AI, but an incredible advancement between the Fan Hui games and this one. Im still going through the kifu to get a sense of how could it have improved so much in only 6 months.

I feel like it started being more aggressive, playing more fighting moves....whereas in the last match it was playing mostly a defensive game (I'm not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, though).

It's exactly the opposite – this last game was much more aggressive on both sides than the Fan Hui match.