Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

gogameguru.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 471 posts

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#351

Post by eru »

Artoemius wrote: post #288
Noge_Sako wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this comment should be so shouted down. Besides the politeness that typically comes with these events, it does feel strange to congratulate, on top of normal politeness, Se-dol's victory. And for a game that was thought to be many decades away in terms of computer capabilities, this probably should be a time to think of the possible consequences of AI improvement and take a close look at it.

I think (or at least hope) most of the downvotes have nothing to do with congratulations, and only refer to the part where AI is called "an amoral field of study that can potentially delegitimize everything that currently makes humans unique and extraordinary". That line of reasoning would be worth a laugh, if it wasn't so widespread in the general population.

Perhaps still better than my friend, who thinks suffering is what makes humans special. Discussions with him are, well, interesting.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#352

Post by skj »

ktRolster wrote: post #280
alphydan wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a number of moves that made absolutely no sense at all even to way lower level players. Another possibility is that it was looking way deeper than anybody, and there was a 1% chance or turning the whole game around with those seemingly bad moves. But Lee Sedol blocked that deep move in a way nobody was able to see.

No. That is not what happened. They were genuinely bad moves.

Probably to the program, they were all bad moves, and the ones it made just hemorrhaged more slowly.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#354

Post by GolDDranks »

GolDDranks wrote: post #320

https://gogameguru.com/lee-sedol-defeats-alphago-masterful-c... > This was when things got weird. From 87 to 101 AlphaGo made a series of very bad moves. It seems to me, that these bad moves were a direct result of AlphaGo's min-maxing tree search. According to @demishassabis' tweet, it had had the "realisation" that it had misestimated the board situation at move 87. After that, it did a series of bad moves, but it…

It would be interesting to see how AlphaGo would play with a handicap – because the skill of overplaying is required from the start in that situation. It might actually suck at handicap games, at the moment.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#355

Post by CydeWeys »

simondedalus wrote: post #286
vowelless wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it really was about money, I don't think he would have spent so much of his life dedicated to Go ...

yeah, not to belabor it, but if you can do something like be a champion in go or chess, chances are you have the mental skillset to do something exponentially more lucrative.

This is not true. Scientific studies have shown that skills in abstract strategy games are so specific to the game that they do not transfer to other tasks. The urban legend about Chess grandmasters all being geniuses is false, in other words. They're actually worse at most jobs than people who've been doing those jobs for awhile, because they lack the experience, and they aren't more predisposed to having a genius intellect that would let them overcome that.

A Chess or Go champion is probably doing the single-most lucrative activity that they are capable of.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#356

Post by eru »

zkhalique wrote: post #284
Tempest1981 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still, wow! And a human is using 100W or so: (~400 max) https://sustainability.blogs.brynmawr.edu/2012/07/31/underst...

And don't forget, the human grows organically from a complex system of DNA that also codes for way more than playing Go! And is able to perform a lot of tasks very efficiently, including cooperating together on open ended activities.

On the other hand, they've only been working on Alphago for two years.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#357

Post by CydeWeys »

hguant wrote: post #312
hibikir wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

78 was hard, but not impossible: If you watch the AGA commentary of the game, they had two pros at the time 78 happened, and they found 78 as the best answer a few minutes before Lee did, expecting AlphaGo to go with a stronger, yet still good not good enough 79, that left the game even, instead of basically lost. Then they were elated about how AlphaGo seemed to have failed to read the whole thing, and instead of do…

It would be interesting to see a neural net evolve to take into account player state, not just game state. I play chess, and no where near professional levels, so I don't know if this anecdote is valuable, but if I see my opponent looking at a particular area of the board, I tend to take a second look. I suppose beating humans isn't AlphaGo's primary motive though - learning to play a perfect game of Go in general is…

Having the AI use eye-tracking to predict an opponent's moves is a truly terrifying thought. Just by tracking the eye with millisecond precision you could probably work out the strategy they were reading. It's so game-breaking that it shouldn't be allowed as an input, and indeed, is easily defeated with reflective sunglasses anyway (like a lot of pro Poker players wear).

The AI player can't give up information in this manner because it lacks eyes, so I'd say that it should not be able to use this information from the human player.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#358

Post by ant6n »

sheepdestroyer wrote: post #207
denim_chicken wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels really weird to see someone being showered with congratulations for beating a computer program. What exactly is he being congratulated for? For probably triggering and then capitalizing on a bug in AlphaGo's AI? For showing that human resolve, perseverance and a "fighting spirit" can trump a flawed AI, at least until the AI gets fixed? For giving DeepMind extremely valuable test data that will only accelerat…

As noted by the live commentator, this has the opportunity to be the third revolution of the game of Go, opening again new ways of playing for the whole of humanity. Imagine what AI, in different fields, means for humanity if it has so much to teach us, just by being able to "think" differently. I sure hope that one day they start writing philosophy and, doing so, potentially legitimize everything that currently make…

What are the other two revolutions of game of Go?

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#359

Post by CydeWeys »

Tempest1981 wrote: post #232
zouhair wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How frigging smart Sedol is?

Kind of cool to know you're as smart as algorithms that require 1920 CPUs and 280 GPUs

We're in the very infancy of the field though. Give it a year and it's likely you'll have a neural-net-based Go program that runs on a single machine that can defeat every single human professional. Human Go players have been getting better for millennia; don't assume that a program that's only two years old has no room for improvement left.

It took some serious hardware for Deep Blue to defeat Garry Kasparov. Now there are smartphone apps with that same level of Chess-playing skill. And if anything the AlphaGo approach is more amenable to running on lower-specced hardware without requiring help from Moore's Law (because you simply train it better).

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#360

Post by eru »

hendekagon wrote: post #183
Angostura wrote: post #146

Bizarre. I felt a palpable sense of relief when I read this. Silly meat-brain that I am.

Living flesh is not meat. Meat is what we call dead flesh. A living brain is made of neural nano-processors.

Are you familiar with different levels of precision in language, and word play?
Post reply on HN