Does anybody know how many CPUs and GPUs they're using this time? It was 1200+ and 700+ in October against Fan Hui. It would be interesting to know if AlphaGo became better only because the extra learning or also because of extra hardware. I googled for that and didn't find anything but I could have missed the right source.
AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
321–330 of 576 posts
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#322As someone who studied AI in college and am a reasonably good amateur player, I have been following the matches between Lee and AlphaGo. AlphaGo plays some unusual moves that go clearly against any classically trained Go players. Moves that simply don't quite fit into the current theories of Go playing, and the world's top players are struggling to explain what's the purpose/strategy behind them. I've been giving it…
Could AlphaGO be winning in a way similar to left handed fencers having an advantage over right handers by wrong footing them rather than simply being better? Would giving Lee more chance to see this style give him a chance to catch up?
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#323Someone somewhere asked why a lot of people in the Go community is taking this in a somewhat hard way, here is my hypothesis: Go, unlike Chess, has deep mytho attached to it. Throughout the history of many Asian countries it's seen as the ultimate abstract strategy game that deeply relies on players' intuition, personality, worldview. The best players are not described as "smart", they are described as "wise". I thin…
> Now imagine the winning author of the next Hugo Award turns out to be an AI, how unsettling would that be. I've been thinking precisely about that. I think a book written by a machine will make the NYT bestseller list within our lifetimes (I would give it a 75% chance within 10 years, but that's just a gut feeling).
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
About a year ago I wrote an AI to play the board game "Hive" (shares some similarities with chess). Because I scored all wins equally, it behaved almost exactly like this. It would simply try to minimize my advantage while always keeping open the possibility for it to win, almost like a cat toying with prey. It never actually would make the winning move – however obvious – until it had no other options! I fixed this…
> It never actually would make the winning move – however obvious – until it had no other options! I'm confused. Why would 'make the winning move' not be the way to maximise probability of winning?
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#325Meanwhile 'Google Translate' translates texts terribly bad. Why don't they work on important tasks?
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#326As someone who studied AI in college and am a reasonably good amateur player, I have been following the matches between Lee and AlphaGo. AlphaGo plays some unusual moves that go clearly against any classically trained Go players. Moves that simply don't quite fit into the current theories of Go playing, and the world's top players are struggling to explain what's the purpose/strategy behind them. I've been giving it…
Until someone got better weapons and suddenly the "rules" of the battlefield that dictated standing in lines across each other made no sense to follow anymore because the original principles that dictated those rules to be good were not valid anymore.
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#327As someone who studied AI in college and am a reasonably good amateur player, I have been following the matches between Lee and AlphaGo. AlphaGo plays some unusual moves that go clearly against any classically trained Go players. Moves that simply don't quite fit into the current theories of Go playing, and the world's top players are struggling to explain what's the purpose/strategy behind them. I've been giving it…
And this is just the beginning with AlphaGo. As we keep on training Deep Learning systems for other domains, we'll realise how differently they approach problems and solve them. It'll, in turn, help us in adapting these different perspectives and applying them to solve other problems as well.
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#328As someone who studied AI in college and am a reasonably good amateur player, I have been following the matches between Lee and AlphaGo. AlphaGo plays some unusual moves that go clearly against any classically trained Go players. Moves that simply don't quite fit into the current theories of Go playing, and the world's top players are struggling to explain what's the purpose/strategy behind them. I've been giving it…
I like your statement: "It's both exciting and eerie. It's like another intelligent species opening up a new way of looking at the world (at least for this very specific domain). and much to our surprise, it's a new way that's more powerful than ours." I think this will the theme of our future interactions with AIs. We simply can't imagine in advance how they will see and interact with the world. There will be many s…
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#329Someone somewhere asked why a lot of people in the Go community is taking this in a somewhat hard way, here is my hypothesis: Go, unlike Chess, has deep mytho attached to it. Throughout the history of many Asian countries it's seen as the ultimate abstract strategy game that deeply relies on players' intuition, personality, worldview. The best players are not described as "smart", they are described as "wise". I thin…
> Now imagine the winning author of the next Hugo Award turns out to be an AI, how unsettling would that be. I've been thinking precisely about that. I think a book written by a machine will make the NYT bestseller list within our lifetimes (I would give it a 75% chance within 10 years, but that's just a gut feeling).
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now imagine the winning author of the next Hugo Award turns out to be an AI, how unsettling would that be. I think that would be pretty awesome and amazing, to be honest.
I think it'd be terrifying. Imagine the best book you've ever read. Entrancing, enlightening, cathartic. You reach the end, and it's ... perfect. Oh hey, a sequel. Wow, the sequel is just as good as the first book. It expands upon it without diminishing the original -- you feel better, more complete for having read it. Wait, is that a third book in the series? Wow, it's even better than the first two! A fourth -- wel…
In the end all life is is one choice after another, and making good ones over bad mostly leads to a happier life.