81–90 of 132 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What hero do you think would be a better test?
Either, (a) high risk/reward heroes: Pudge, Huskar, maybe Weaver or Puck, or (b) highly complex heroes: Invoker, Morphling, Earth Spirit, Nature's Prophet, Techies, maybe Meepo.
I'd also argue that chess and go are both vastly more difficult problem sets. We literally do not have the computational power to solve a game of chess and it's projected that we won't for another 50-100 years.
What are the definitions of AI and game complexity in this field?
These all sound like very exiting developments. As I read about them a lot of times games such as Dota and Starcraft are touted as more complex than Chess or Go, but--at least with Starcraft, the AIs are limited in their number of actions to level the playing field. Isn't that like claiming humans can run faster than greyhounds, provided that the greyhounds only get to use two legs? Or maybe claiming that humans are better at chess when computers are restricted to the maximum human ply depth?
I also noticed a claim--again, in a Starcraft related article--that the AIs previously couldn't beat the build-in AIs (the computer players). What type of AIs are considered as challengers here? Only blank-slate self learning AIs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(I work at OpenAI.) We'll have another blog post coming in the next few days. But as a sneak peek: we use self-play to learn everything that depends on an interaction with the opponent. Didn't need to with those that don't (e.g. fixed item builds, separately learned creep block).
So it's not exclusively unsupervised self-play? This contradicts how it was portrayed during the game/afterwards.
All the bots have to do is spew tons of toxic crap in chat. Then they will be like any other real life DOTA player.
Pretty much agree with everything in here. As I said in my earlier posting (and this blog post reiterates), a 1v1 Shadowfiend mid is highly technical and does not require a huge search space (like in Go or Chess) or any judgment; all it takes is a few tactics (e.g. creep blocking) and good aim for the razes. Also, the bot was already beaten 50+ times[1]. There are at least 3 strategies that work. It just goes to show…
This whole OpenAI gets hyped a lot on HN - it's interesting who is behind OpenAI. They are misusing the "Open" name as there is no substantial open in OpenAI - it's also no open source project - it's not related to OpenGL, OpenAL, etc at all! I don't get the hype around AI bots for StarCraft 2 and DotA 2. There is nothing special now, we had such bots developed for many years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would be impressive about that? How's that something to get hyped for? I was being somewhat fatuous, as that is a common scare scenario. However, I do believe that it should be our goal as a human species, to create AGI as our intellectual successor. In the same way someone's child replaces them and they die, I think AGI should be our offspring and we as a species go peacefully into oblivion. It's my life's work…
I don't understand the logic. Why should humanity go peacefully into oblivion with the advent of smarter than human machines? Do you feel like all the other species on this planet should have gone extinct with the arrival of homo sapiens? Your argument is that since B is better than A, only B should exist. But why can't both exist? And what makes your valuation of B objective and universal, such that our grandchildre…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What hero do you think would be a better test?
It's not about which hero 1v1 is not a competitive part of dota, if you claim beat pro players it has to be 5v5 with banpick Otherwise just say it's 1v1 mid...