AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#121

Post by oneeyedpigeon » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:26 AM UTC

danmaz74 wrote: post #116

bronz wrote: post #52

Once again, I am so glad that I caught this on the live-stream because it will be in the history books. The implications of these games are absolutely tremendous. Consider GO: it is a game of sophisticated intuition. We have arguably created something that beats the human brain in its own arena, although the brain and AlphaGO do not use the same underlying mechanisms. And this is the supervised model. Once unsupervis…

> Consider GO: it is a game of sophisticated intuition It's still a game that can be described in terms of clear state-machine rules. The real challenge for AI is making sense and acting in the real world, which can't be described in such way. I consider advances in self-driving cars much more interesting in that sense - even if, even there, there are at least some rule-based constraints that can be applied to simpli…

But AlphaGo isn't an enormous state machine ... is it?

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#122

Post by 21 » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:28 AM UTC

School-Cotton wrote: post #97

21 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you feel guilty when you break your promise against your cat? Do you even think for a nanosecond if it's ethical to lie to it? Of course, a cat is not conscious. But compared to an AI, we might also be considered pretty low consciousness beings, or at least beings in front of which you don't justify yourself.

> Of course, a cat is not conscious. How do you know?

I'm not an expert in this domain, but I think it's pretty much scientific consensus that this is the case.

Now experts can discuss details or semantics, but do you truly suggest cats might be conscious?

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#123

Post by emcq » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:29 AM UTC

badminton1 wrote: post #64

yulunli wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to be more impressive than the Deep Blue moment. In 1996, Deep Blue didn't make it on the first try. Even in 1997, it has been a draw until the 6th game. Although AlphaGo has 2 games to go, the first three seem to be a clear victory.

Far more impressive than the Deep Blue moment. This time the computer did not win out of pure bruteforce. Deep Blue relied on an opening book and massive computational power to explore the game tree. After the opening it was pretty much on its own, bruteforcing moves. This technology used a neural network trained with hundreds of thousands of games which provided the pattern matching aspect, combined with the brutefo…

Assuming a Titan X with single precision, those 600 GPUs are 4 PFlops! Deep Blue extrapolated to today with Moore's law would only be ~72TFlops.

While DNN+RL+Tree search is cool, the hardware requirements for AlphaGo to play at this level are staggering and only supported by large marketing budgets :)

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#124

Post by abecedarius » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:29 AM UTC

nkurz wrote: post #100

Radim wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Challenging Ke Jie is way too small a goal for DeepMind at this point. I wonder if even the idea from the AGA stream today, to get all the best pros in the world together and challenge AlphaGo as a team, is enough. Perhaps releasing the core AlphaGo as open source (to the extent it's not dependent on internal Google machinery), or at least publishing its trained model, may be the next step. Let people "challenge them…

I wonder if even the idea from the AGA stream today, to get all the best pros in the world together and challenge AlphaGo as a team, is enough. Has this been tried? That is, have Players 2-9 (or some subset) ever competed as a group against a dominant Player 1? Unless it's been tested, I wouldn't take it for granted that a group would beat an individual.

I wouldn't know, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov_versus_the_World happened in chess.

> He later said, "It is the greatest game in the history of chess. The sheer number of ideas, the complexity, and the contribution it has made to chess make it the most important game ever played."

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#125

Post by pokolovsky » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:30 AM UTC

alextgordon wrote: post #104

pushrax wrote: post #31

It's important to remember that this is an accomplishment of humanity, not a defeat. By constructing this AI, we are simply creating another tool for advancing our state of being. (or something like that)

What is our purpose if computers can do everything better than us? It feels like computers have taken one aspect of humanness: logic. Computers could do arithmetic, do algebra, play chess, and now they can play go. It hurts because logic is usually thought to be one of the highest of human characteristics. Yes computers might never be able to replicate emotion, but even dogs have that. There's still some aspects we h…

What is the purpose and meaning of anything else? We human being is just a node in the evolution of the whole universe.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#126

Post by oneeyedpigeon » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:31 AM UTC

spicyj wrote: post #75

PeCaN wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From watching it I'm almost inclined to say it maximizes its chances of not losing over necessarily winning.

Sorry, but what's the difference?

Yeah, isn't Lee Sedol playing with the same objective? It sounds like people are implying he's trying to thrash the AI. Or do they mean he can't help but have such an objective, subconsciously?

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#127

Post by wagglycocks » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:33 AM UTC

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #98

tim333 wrote: post #27

Kind of a shame the tournament isn't closer.

I think so too. I actually feel really bad for Lee Sedol if he loses 5-0.

The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#128

Post by nathan_f77 » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:35 AM UTC

studentrob wrote: post #94

Eliezer wrote: post #79

My (long) commentary here: https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154018209759228 Sample: At this point it seems likely that Sedol is actually far outclassed by a superhuman player. The suspicion is that since AlphaGo plays purely for probability of long-term victory rather than playing for points, the fight against Sedol generates boards that can falsely appear to a human to be balanced even as Sedol's probabili…

I wonder if he could identify those long-term-thinking moves by playing a version of AlphaGo on a smaller board, then gradually increasing the size of the board over successive games once he is able to consistently win or tie at a given board size. I also wonder if when Alpha Go plays itself, does it always win when it is black or white, does it always tie, or is it a mix? So much to learn from this.

There is typically a point advantage of around 7 points when you get the chance to play the first move. In professional matches, white will be given a 6.5 point bonus to compensate for this. So yes I think it's fair to assume that black usually wins. Actually, AlphaGo could probably be used to calculate the perfect number of points, because it has changed over the years. In China they have a 7.5 point bonus for white.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#129

Post by atemerev » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:36 AM UTC

alextgordon wrote: post #104

pushrax wrote: post #31

It's important to remember that this is an accomplishment of humanity, not a defeat. By constructing this AI, we are simply creating another tool for advancing our state of being. (or something like that)

What is our purpose if computers can do everything better than us? It feels like computers have taken one aspect of humanness: logic. Computers could do arithmetic, do algebra, play chess, and now they can play go. It hurts because logic is usually thought to be one of the highest of human characteristics. Yes computers might never be able to replicate emotion, but even dogs have that. There's still some aspects we h…

No it won't. Natural languages are the next focal point of AI research. Expect big changes in the next few years.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#130

Post by tim333 » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:36 AM UTC

School-Cotton wrote: post #97

21 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you feel guilty when you break your promise against your cat? Do you even think for a nanosecond if it's ethical to lie to it? Of course, a cat is not conscious. But compared to an AI, we might also be considered pretty low consciousness beings, or at least beings in front of which you don't justify yourself.

> Of course, a cat is not conscious. How do you know?

Cat's are obviously conscious in the sense of the dictionary definition "aware of and responding to one's surroundings; awake." Unless you knock one out or similar.

Arguing they are not conscious in the sense of a more obscure definition is a bit pointless unless you specify your definition.