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

391–400 of 471 posts

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#391

Post by sheepdestroyer »

ant6n wrote: post #358
sheepdestroyer wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

cf post game 3 conference commentary : https://youtu.be/qUAmTYHEyM8?t=20639

(also during the actual game with more details, but I can not find the exact time again). Edit : can not find game3 commentary but during game 4 he is coming back to it again with interesting details as for why this is a great opportunity to inspire human players : https://youtu.be/yCALyQRN3hw?t=7097

Basically, once in ancient Japan and more recently a Chinese origin player in Japan, both incredibly strong players, surprised everyone with never before seen moves that subsequently where integrated in modern game theory. The hope is that the same could happen here.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#392

Post by CydeWeys »

V-2 wrote: post #390
CydeWeys wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

What scientific studies are you referring to? Of course chess grandmasters aren't all-around geniuses, but many traits that are prerequisites for a successful chess player certainly are translatable into careers in other fields, and correlate with above average brainpower (good memory, discipline, long attention span, spatial intelligence etc.) Botvinnik was an accomplished engineer, Euwe had PhD in mathematics, Anat…

There's a whole body of research out there, but I just scratched the surface of it. Here's the first result that's coming up from a random Google search. https://psy.fsu.edu/faculty/ericsson/ericsson.exp.perf.html The references should be worth exploring, and I bet there's more recent research that expands on it as well. Here's a quote from the paper:

> In a recent review, Ericsson and Lehmann (1996) found that (1) measures of general basic capacities do not predict success in a domain, (2) the superior performance of experts is often very domain specific and transfer outside their narrow area of expertise is surprisingly limited and (3) systematic differences between experts and less proficient individuals nearly always reflect attributes acquired by the experts during their lengthy training.

I will say this for Chess or Go grandmasters: They have drive and dedication (and in some cases, compulsiveness). That alone would probably allow them to do better than the average person in another field if they had pursued that field from the get-go. Also, I'd caution you against relying on hand-picked anecdotes; I could just as easily pick out a bunch of Chess players who weren't good for anything else. You'd need broad-based statistics.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#393

Post by CydeWeys »

rifung wrote: post #388
CydeWeys wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

I'm not sure you're disagreeing with the person you're responding to. Just because the skills involved are very specific doesn't imply that the people with those skills only are capable of obtaining said skill. What the person you're responding to means is that if they have the mental capacity (and also discipline) to play the game at such a high level, they could probably also excel in other professions if their goa…

You are relying too much on the concept of a generalized mental capacity, which many researchers (maybe even most) would say does not exist. You seem to be assuming that grandmasters are just amazingly smart and they happen to apply those smarts to one particular skill, but what's closer to the truth is that they happen to be particularly amazing at that one skill, in a way that doesn't really correlate strongly with having amazingly high skill in other areas.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#394

Post by CydeWeys »

cLeEOGPw wrote: post #384
CydeWeys wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first data point tells you more about bounds than any individual subsequent data point. Knowing that a human can defeat AlphaGo is enormously important. To use an analogy, having confirmation of contact by even a single alien species would be hugely important, way more so than exactly nailing down the number of alien species. Knowing that something is even possible is oftentimes the most important aspect that nee…

At the time chess was "the" problem, humans could beat computer too from time to time. Now the chess is solved. Same will likely happen to go in the years to come. But the point of this was not the go itself. It was the demonstration of potential capabilities of neural network and other machine learning algorithms.

Chess isn't solved. It's just that computers have gotten sufficiently better at it than humans that humans don't have a chance.

If Chess were truly solved, then you wouldn't be able to make a new AI program that could do better than even odds against the existing ones. But that's not the case, and incremental advancements in Chess-playing programs are made all the time. There are even tournaments where Chess programs play each other. If Chess were solved, such a thing wouldn't make any sense, just like how there are no Tic-Tac-Toe tournaments because that game is solved.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#395

Post by SilasX »

ScottBurson wrote: post #334
SilasX wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OT: What's with using monotype for quotes? That's breaks line wrapping and makes it hard to read on mobile or small screens. I don't get why people do it.

"People" don't do it; HN does it. Indented lines in a post are always monospaced, on the assumption, I suppose, that they're likely to be code examples. There's no way to turn this off AFAIK. And no, HN does not use Markdown.

I know the formatting system. My question is why the users are formatting their text (e.g. with 4 places leading each line) *suc that HN renders it as monospace, which then forces a sideways scroll on mobile and small screens. That seems to make it harder to read for some with no corresponding upside.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#396

Post by ludamad »

CydeWeys wrote: post #357
hguant wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 thi…

Seems like just another avenue to trick the computer

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#397

Post by Sharlin »

eru wrote: post #349
Sharlin wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope that was irony.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Better_Angels_of_Our_Natur...

Yes, I know, it's just completely insane to declare that we've somehow qualitatively moved past our brutish origins as long as torture, rape, and murder remain de facto extensions to politics.

I have no reason to doubt that quantitatively we have made some progress - although Pinker's arguments are most definitely not universally accepted in the scientific community.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#398

Post by V-2 »

CydeWeys wrote: post #392
V-2 wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What scientific studies are you referring to? Of course chess grandmasters aren't all-around geniuses, but many traits that are prerequisites for a successful chess player certainly are translatable into careers in other fields, and correlate with above average brainpower (good memory, discipline, long attention span, spatial intelligence etc.) Botvinnik was an accomplished engineer, Euwe had PhD in mathematics, Anat…

There's a whole body of research out there, but I just scratched the surface of it. Here's the first result that's coming up from a random Google search. https://psy.fsu.edu/faculty/ericsson/ericsson.exp.perf.html The references should be worth exploring, and I bet there's more recent research that expands on it as well. Here's a quote from the paper: > In a recent review, Ericsson and Lehmann (1996) found that (1) m…

Thanks for the link. Well, of course I just quoted a few examples without pretending it's legitimate piece of statistics, however, there hasn't been all that many world chess champions so far (and Botvinnik, Smyslov, Euwe, Karpov, belong in that category), and thus a few PhDs or successful intellectual careers is already enough to show that something clearly sets this bunch apart from the general public. You're less likely to find a plumber or a shelf-stacker in that bus (no disrespect for people in these professions). Whatever causes that is another matter. I agree with you that drive and dedication - and not necessarily some innate talents - could be the crucial factor in this.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#399

Post by lazugod »

toolslive wrote: post #205
zsiciarz wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By NN you mean a neural network, of course? That makes even more sense...

NN = nomen nescio ("I don't know the name") You use it when you cannot name the source of a quote, or when you would like to protect the source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomen_nescio

Using the acronym of the phrase defeats the purpose, though, since it looks like someone's initials.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#400

Post by Noge_Sako »

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.

amoral

>Both have to do with right and wrong, but amoral means having no sense of either

Well that's true then! A nice quote is from Feynman in regards to scientific research.

"To every man is given the key to the gates of heaven; the same key opens the gates of hell. — Richard Feynman "

We really have no idea yet how this AI research will play out.

I don't quite like the line "Delegitimize all that makes people unique and special" But that's my only real disagreement.

Post reply on HN