Live data from Hacker News

Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

techcrunch.com

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#31
post #27

I thought this was supposed to be a few years away -- i.e beating Lee Sidol was impressive, but Lee wasn't nearly the top player in the world? Wow, this must be what it feels like to be living on a parabolic curve...

Lee Sedol was near the top (#7). He wasn't the very top, that was Ke Jie. And now Ke Jie has been beaten 2/3, maybe 3/3 times. Sedol was beaten soundly -- 4/5 games. So this is an improvement, but not an exponential one. Go is definitely conquered like chess was 1-2 decades ago. https://www.goratings.org/en/

Ironic that even though Sedol is not the strongest human player, he may end up being the last human in history to beat the strongest AI.

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#32
post #27

I thought this was supposed to be a few years away -- i.e beating Lee Sidol was impressive, but Lee wasn't nearly the top player in the world? Wow, this must be what it feels like to be living on a parabolic curve...

Lee Sedol was near the top (#7). He wasn't the very top, that was Ke Jie. And now Ke Jie has been beaten 2/3, maybe 3/3 times. Sedol was beaten soundly -- 4/5 games. So this is an improvement, but not an exponential one. Go is definitely conquered like chess was 1-2 decades ago. https://www.goratings.org/en/

> this is an improvement, but not an exponential one.

I wonder how you define exponential here. If the old version had a probability 20% of losing against Lee Sedol, and the new one has 5%, then one might call it exponential. Something like losing prob = 2^(2012-current year).

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#33

I thought this was supposed to be a few years away -- i.e beating Lee Sidol was impressive, but Lee wasn't nearly the top player in the world? Wow, this must be what it feels like to be living on a parabolic curve...

AlphaGo had a fundamentally new architecture (nobody had successfully applied convolutional neural networks to Go before, although of course the headline underestimates the expertise and experimentation that's needed to get the details right).

So it's not surprising that at the first public announcement they hadn't yet pushed the technology as far as it would go.

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#35

To be fair, AlphaGo probably utilizes ensembles of networks in some form anyway. So, in a way, it's kind of been playing as a team this whole time :)

Well, what do you think your brain is? :)

a series of interconnecting drives, shafts, and levers?

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#36
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is common. The Chinese commentator Gu Li mentioned pair game and team game. But I cannot find an English page about it. Here is a Chinese Wikipedia page. https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/zh-hans/团队围棋 FWIW, the five people team played with Ke Joe before the game and won (again, according to Gu Li.)

Thank you. This is interesting and I didn't expect it!

Playing go cooperatively is very different from chess or most other turn-based tactical games in that combinatorics make the gamespace astronomically large. Most pro players understand what impact this has on gameplay and how to adapt their risk management strategies to the game. Way back in the day, popular man v cpu strategies took into account the limitations of monte carlo simulations and would intentionally make moves that change the game state as much as possible to exploit how hard the computer would need to work in order to begin finding optimal moves.

I think alpha go has advanced to the point where its unlikely human players can reliably defeat it, but I think there are still opportunities for better algorithmic players to defeat it.

Anyways, certain moves can cut off game states by the quadrillions, so it's often pretty intuitive what an optimal response to a move is, given certain context of the board and sometimes the player. In that respect, I'm curious how pro level go is going to change after these alpha go games are studied, because it has a very peculiar, decidedly calculatorish style of play, but it's obviously very effective regardless. Go has prospered for so long because there's so much room to express yourself in a move, pro players really play with their whole soul, but computers are just taking advantage of the pure mathematical angles of the game

It's fascinating stuff. I really want to see the alpha go team write a starcraft ai or something like that.

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've once read someone comparing the energy efficeincy of the human brain compared to all the CPUs used by one of these neural networks. The human brain turned out to be more efficient by many orders of magnitude. Sadly I have no recollection of where I've read this.

Sure, but I wasn't making any rigorous statements around human brain power vs Google ML I was suggesting more simply that the original comment talking about 10x developer wasn't referring to just AlphaGo. Apparently it wasn't clear that I'm limiting my comments strictly to what's observable in the chat forum and not making sweeping statements about humans. Though I suspect self-selection bias might also explain the d…

I didn't down-vote you, but I do disagree. This isn't some desperate attempt to hold on to some sort of artificial superiority to machines. I'd be thrilled if machines could do my job, because honestly half of it is mundane (the other half is communicating and interacting with humans).

I'm just being honest about the limitations of current models. I'm also very interested about the impact of generalization. If we make a single model capable of multiple tasks, will that sacrifice the ability to perform on each individual task? Or will it scale?

Re: Google’s AlphaGo AI defeats team of five leading Go players

#39
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what do you think your brain is? :)

a series of interconnecting drives, shafts, and levers?

it's like the internet, a series of tubes! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cZC67wXUTs&ab_channel=super...
Post reply on HN