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

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

en.yna.co.kr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 554 posts

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

#111

Post by Quarrelsome »

dragontamer wrote: post #35

While I can understand Lee Se-dol's frustration, I think there are better lessons to learn from Kasparov's acceptance after the Deep Blue vs Kasparov matches. Cyborg chess is the future of chess. Period. Chess players use computers to train themselves and explore openings in human-only settings, while programmers / cyborgs play correspondence chess. Go is not finished as a game. A new tool, MCTS + Neural nets, has be…

We should note that Kasparov was actually wrong at the time. Alpha Zero has proved this by smashing Stockfish every time it plays it. The contemporary thinking around chess theory including the measures that DeepBlue would brute-force towards were inherently lossy and nobody figured it hard enough. Technically, at that time DeepBlue could have been beaten by understanding Alpha Zero's theorems before Alpha Zero discovered them.

So there was a window between the 90's and today where a human player could have discarded the traditional measuring sticks of "trade-value" and beaten DeepBlue.

Maybe that's not true today or maybe there's a further theory out there?

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

#112

Post by jakeinspace »

neohaven wrote: post #93
SchoolboyBlue wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

As a person who likes music, making it, listening to it, breaking it down and hacking it... Making a classical arrangement that evokes a particular expression in the listener is the job of the musician. If an AI system helps you explore the possibilities there, it's more like a studio musician that's able to improvise. You're still the person, the human, the emotional filter, that picks "This sounds right" or "This d…

Real, authentic music generation is a harder problem than go or chess, but I'm not sure that makes it any more emotionally difficult for a future writer to face a true musical AI than it was for Lee Se-Dol or Kasparov.

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

#113

Post by fishnchips »

forinti wrote: post #106
SchoolboyBlue wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Penguins can outswim even Phelps. The one physical activity at which humans excel is long-distance running.

What about horses?

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

#114

Post by kraftman »

neohaven wrote: post #93
SchoolboyBlue wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

As a person who likes music, making it, listening to it, breaking it down and hacking it... Making a classical arrangement that evokes a particular expression in the listener is the job of the musician. If an AI system helps you explore the possibilities there, it's more like a studio musician that's able to improvise. You're still the person, the human, the emotional filter, that picks "This sounds right" or "This d…

I'm sure they'd have said the same thing about a computer being able to win Go not so many years ago...

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

#115

Post by lucidrains »

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.

On the other hand, it must be sobering to realize that even with an entire lifetime of practice, you will never be better than a simple residual network trained for less than a week.

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

#116

Post by vbezhenar »

jakeinspace wrote: post #112
neohaven wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a person who likes music, making it, listening to it, breaking it down and hacking it... Making a classical arrangement that evokes a particular expression in the listener is the job of the musician. If an AI system helps you explore the possibilities there, it's more like a studio musician that's able to improvise. You're still the person, the human, the emotional filter, that picks "This sounds right" or "This d…

Real, authentic music generation is a harder problem than go or chess, but I'm not sure that makes it any more emotionally difficult for a future writer to face a true musical AI than it was for Lee Se-Dol or Kasparov.

It might be hard to judge. Some people will insist that generated music is bad, because it's just their subjective opinion, even if 90% of random selection will find that music good.

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

#117

Post by cjbprime »

trasneoir wrote: post #71
kylek wrote: post #8

That's unfortunate. I wonder if we'll need a new term for this kind of "chilling effect". What else won't people explore or further themselves in due to the presence AI?

It seems clear that bots will dominate humans in many/most competitive closed-world games over the next couple of years: They are already unbeatable in perfect-information games like Chess and Go. They could crush human motor racers tomorrow. They will be unbeatable in games with limited information (Dota/Starcraft) within months. The next frontier is donkey-space games like rps, poker and day-trading ( https://unive…

FWIW I think I'd reverse the order of poker and StarCraft -- I think Poker's already beating world champion pros regularly, but last year's SC2 champ (Serral) doesn't think it's at his level yet, which is corroborated by its MMR being lower than his on ladder. And DeepMind seem to be winding down their SC2 involvement now, without issuing a challenge to him.

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

#118

Post by karmakaze »

I've spent so many years playing and hearing about how Go will not be solved in our lifetime that the day AlphaGo won 4/5 games v Lee Sedol marked my personal timeline into what came before and after. I walked around all day in a daze watching people as they go about their daily lives as if nothing had happened.

I've heard it said that man landing on the moon was like that for them, but I didn't understand as it was the only world I knew.

Now I can appreciate that these were the firsts of many singularities yet to come in AI and space exploration and I hope to live to witness a few more (but not too many).

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

#120

Post by lern_too_spel »

dragontamer wrote: post #98
lern_too_spel wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you can build opening book databases to exploit their patterns. And then program the computer to use that opening book directly. Now what is your cyborg player going to do? After you patch all these easy rules, you will have to discover harder rules, and the computer can discover them faster than you can.

> Now what is your cyborg player going to do? Build and configure the machine better. Quick, tell me, what's better at playing Chess: * Or is Xeon Platinum 8180 with maximum 8-way SMT memory sharing with a big-ol 1TB shared transposition table the fastest computer? * Or will it be cheaper to rent AWS-instances with their V100 GPU in the cloud? Or is the latency for the remote-access bad? -------- The cyborg player ha…

> Build and configure the machine better.

It's a stretch to categorize that as a cyborg player. You might as well categorize any chess program as a cyborg player because a human had to program and train it.

The key difference between cyborg/centaur/advanced chess and plain old computer chess is whether there is a human in the loop making the move decisions. My argument is that having a human in the loop will result in a worse player.

Post reply on HN