Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players • Hacker News Board

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#21

Post by SchoolboyBlue » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

mourner wrote: post #6

> Even if I become the number one, there is an entity that cannot be defeated Hard for me to empathize with this argument for his retirement. If we can't outrun a car, does that make running competitions pointless? The existence of AlphaGo doesn't diminish the triumph of being a number one human player in any way.

I would counter with the fact that in physical endeavors it's apparent to us that we are not #1 - our household cats are more agile than us.

It's in matters of intellect that humans still believe they are #1.

AlphaGO's achievement in another field would have similar effects, e.g.:

- An AI that diagnoses sickness better than any doctor

- An AI that generates text which humans believe more beautiful than any other poetry created

- An AI which creates classical arrangements the likes of which we compare to Mozart

I would imagine that in any of those situations some doctors, authors, and musicians alike would be devastated.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#22

Post by jakswa » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

grenoire wrote: post #16

TylerE wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not actually true. In a sprint race, yes, but in a 24 hr race the human will outdistance the horse.

What assumptions are you basing this on, curious to know if horses have a disadvantage over longer durations.

My assumption when I read your parent comment was: Two legs are more efficient than four, and can go farther before exhaustion... but that's full of holes. Horses are huge, bristling with energy, right?

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#23

Post by frgtpsswrdlame » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

grenoire wrote: post #16

TylerE wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not actually true. In a sprint race, yes, but in a 24 hr race the human will outdistance the horse.

What assumptions are you basing this on, curious to know if horses have a disadvantage over longer durations.

It's true, google it. The combination of two legs and relative lack of hair make humans one of the best long distance runners in the animal kingdom.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#24

Post by mwigdahl » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

knolax wrote: post #9

lordnacho wrote: post #3

It would be a bit sad if the fact that there's good AI players discourages future generations from Go, Chess and other games. Weirdly the AI will have destroyed the basis for its own existence, at least in this niche.

The way that AI is used in chess might hopefully imply otherwise. IIRC most popular chess services like chess.com use AI to help train players.

Multiple online Go servers also use AI review for teaching purposes, in addition to supporting games against AI players of varying strengths.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#25

Post by manifestsilence » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:36 PM UTC

grenoire wrote: post #16

TylerE wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not actually true. In a sprint race, yes, but in a 24 hr race the human will outdistance the horse.

What assumptions are you basing this on, curious to know if horses have a disadvantage over longer durations.

Not sure about horses specifically, but humans are uniquely adapted to long distance travel among large land animals and used it for hunting by out-performing most other species:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

Edit: it's one of two things I know of that we really excel at besides thinking. The other being accurate throwing, which perhaps explains baseball's enduring appeal:

https://what-if.xkcd.com/44/

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#26

Post by mdgrech23 » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:36 PM UTC

SchoolboyBlue wrote: post #21

mourner wrote: post #6

> Even if I become the number one, there is an entity that cannot be defeated Hard for me to empathize with this argument for his retirement. If we can't outrun a car, does that make running competitions pointless? The existence of AlphaGo doesn't diminish the triumph of being a number one human player in any way.

I would counter with the fact that in physical endeavors it's apparent to us that we are not #1 - our household cats are more agile than us. It's in matters of intellect that humans still believe they are #1. AlphaGO's achievement in another field would have similar effects, e.g.: - An AI that diagnoses sickness better than any doctor - An AI that generates text which humans believe more beautiful than any other poet…

I mean I guess but that's more b/c they haven't got use to the concept of a computer beating them yet. Give it a few years and people will adjust.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#27

Post by conanbatt » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

mourner wrote: post #6

> Even if I become the number one, there is an entity that cannot be defeated Hard for me to empathize with this argument for his retirement. If we can't outrun a car, does that make running competitions pointless? The existence of AlphaGo doesn't diminish the triumph of being a number one human player in any way.

Playing Go differs severely from a sport where the point is to maximize your physical output.

A Professional Go player is an explorer of truth in a millenarian board, spelunking in a vast universe of possibilities. The purpose of playing is attacked when there is an automated, effortless way to do that exploring faster and better. Why look for new things when a computer can find 100 in a minute?

The professional mindset of a Go player differs vastly from the amateur mindset.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#28

Post by mac01021 » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

ronilan wrote: post #4

> "With the debut of AI in Go games, I've realized that I'm not at the top even if I become the number one through frantic efforts,” There is something sad about this comment. It’s as if, even while standing at the peak, he doesn’t grasp what being “at top” actually is. Would Eliud Kipchoge say the same thing about a motorcycle?

I always thought Kasparov was granted a tremendous opportunity by the advent of computer chess.

He spent his life honing his skills, becoming better and better at chess until he was the very best. And then, when noone could challenge him, technology emerged that would allow him to continue being challenged and improving his chess game. Something no other human could allow him to do.

Granted, I'm pretty ignorant about competitive chess and how to get better at it. But if my way of looking at it is valid then it probably applies to Lee Se-dol too.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#29

Post by mumblemumble » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

hanspragt wrote: post #20

grenoire wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What assumptions are you basing this on, curious to know if horses have a disadvantage over longer durations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_versus_Horse_Marathon

tl;dr: Annual 22-mile race with both pedestrian and equestrian competitors. Out of the 40 times it's been held, the winner was a human twice, and a horse 38 times. Typically the spread between the fastest human and the fastest horse has been less than 10 minutes.

Re: Go master Lee Se-dol says he quits, unable to win over AI Go players

#30

Post by rosybox » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

SchoolboyBlue wrote: post #21

mourner wrote: post #6

> Even if I become the number one, there is an entity that cannot be defeated Hard for me to empathize with this argument for his retirement. If we can't outrun a car, does that make running competitions pointless? The existence of AlphaGo doesn't diminish the triumph of being a number one human player in any way.

I would counter with the fact that in physical endeavors it's apparent to us that we are not #1 - our household cats are more agile than us. It's in matters of intellect that humans still believe they are #1. AlphaGO's achievement in another field would have similar effects, e.g.: - An AI that diagnoses sickness better than any doctor - An AI that generates text which humans believe more beautiful than any other poet…

> An AI that generates text which humans believe more beautiful than any other poetry created - An AI which creates classical arrangements the likes of which we compare to Mozart

Hrm, I do think that AI would be able to create narratives that humans find more enjoyable than the work of other humans, and I agree that AI would be able to create pictures and sound that humans find to be more enjoyable to look at or hear than the raw work of humans. AI can master the technical feats of composition and art.

But what I doubt AI will ever be able to do is create art that speaks to us. It wont ever be able to create a Guernica. It wont be able to create a Crime and Punishment. It wont understand what it is to be human and mortal, what suffering is, and it wont be able to look within itself and find what those things mean to it and then share that with us, because in the end it's just a bunch of code running statistical computations. It wont fear death, it wont have children it cares about or a family history to look on and tell us about. It has nothing of emotive value to share.