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

#181

Post by CamperBob2 » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:14 PM UTC

pvg wrote: post #76

asfarley wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is degrading and short-sighted. Why wouldn't an AI fear death? What is your fundamental reason for thinking that silicon-based computation is better than neurotransmitter-based computation? How can you believe that any two forms of computation are fundamentally different, despite countless examples of different systems all being equivalent in the Turing-completeness sense? I believe that arguments like yours, in…

However terrible someone's argument about a hypothetical, non-existent technology might be, comparing it to real human prejudice that's affected countless real lives is way, way more terrible.

Not an invalid point at all. The only question is how long it'll take to come to pass.

I disagree with the "relatively near future" part, but rest assured, AI rights will eventually be a thing.

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

#182

Post by karmakaze » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

axegon_ wrote: post #167

karmakaze wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw this coming even before Alpha Go won 4/5 games vs Lee Sedol. Imagine if you worked all your life to be the best software developer in the world and won all official competitive tournaments with spectators in the field. Then along comes some newfangled ML that not only writes programs faster than you, but the programs are qualitatively orders of magnitude better organized and using algorithms you could only begi…

Kind of apples to oranges. Many people have tried to build models to write code. And while some have managed to make some progress, compared to us, the structures and algorithms are crap at best. Even though those NN's are RNN's, you can look at GAN's for an analogy: they can make some really photo-realistic images but there is a problem - the fact that you can't give them well defined rules: "cats have 4 legs and 1…

Machines don't need these rules. Cars don't need to be symmetrical any more than an antenna or other structure[0]. This is exactly analogous to how AlphaGo/AlphaZero played strange bad-looking moves.

[0] https://medium.com/intuitionmachine/the-alien-look-of-deep-l...

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

#183

Post by fishnchips » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

mrkstu wrote: post #138

fishnchips wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about horses?

Humans will lose in short distances but a well conditioned athlete can win in a 20+ mile distance over a horse.

It seems that the jury’s still out on that one. Man vs horse marathon is mostly won by horses, and by a long margin.

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

#184

Post by ksec » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

There was a Chinese Legend that the best person in Go is not one who beat every single opponents, but in absolute control, which means he could play the game and always end with a draw.

I certainly think it was more of a myth, as it was used in context to play Go with the Emperor, and always play to a draw or lose by a stone. ( You cannot or not allowed to win against the Emperor )

I wonder if this is now possible to achieve with AI.

And why do they not move on to AlphaZero, which was better than AlphaGo Lee played against, and when AlphaGo had two stone advantage, Surely they can now test with level of playing field? And next step to only allowed AI use a specific amount of energy, or the energy an average human brain consume?

I mean right now my guess is that DeepMind is likely using thousands if not millions times more energy to make those moves, that is like an Army of million against one General.

And what real world productivity can we adopt and use from DeepMind?

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

#185

Post by simonh » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

visarga wrote: post #160

Barrin92 wrote: post #60

I think this is a strange reason to retire and as the article points out it might also simply be due to the legal conflict he is currently in with the KBA. Chess engines have been defeating humans for 20+ years (and are overwhelmingly stronger for a long time), but that hasn't diminished the interest in competitive chess, because the human element of competition and struggle and deep fundamental appreciation for the…

> AlphaGo can play go but it cannot appreciate the beauty of the game On the contrary, appreciating the game is the core of what AlphaGo does. In order to search the tree of moves it learns how to play (expand search) and how to evaluate (cut off branches of search). I believe it might appreciate the game on a deeper level than humans, in its own unique way. Of course it can't appreciate the social aspect of the game…

That’s being way too anthropomorphic. You could just as well say it aims to minimise the pain of Go, but neither interpretation is warranted.

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

#186

Post by arcticfox » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

scarmig wrote: post #154

Akababa wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a really oversimplified view. The truth is beyond a certain point no amount of "theorizing" is enough to overcome the sheer computational power of programs. AlphaZero just took advantage of recent advances in neural networks and GPU hardware to achieve a better tradeoff between hard rules and heuristics than Stockfish. Both of them are probably Pareto efficient in some sense, and barring some insane undiscover…

Question: if we discovered a way for white to always force a win, would humans be able to use that to beat black AIs consistently?

It feels kind of surprising that this doesn't exist (yet). There are only a handful of reasonable moves per turn, and given the unbelievable amounts of moves that offline chess engines can process given time and server farms, I'm just surprised that doesn't overwhelm the reasonable branches at some point into forcing a win. Maybe someday.

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

#187

Post by tialaramex » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

fishnchips wrote: post #113

forinti wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What about horses?

It's hard to get good comparisons, but over distance individual horses don't seem to out-perform human distance runners.

When humans used horses for rapid courier service they used relay tactics to take advantage of the horse's higher top speed, one horse might only run for an hour or two, before the rider reached another outpost and swapped a tired horse for a fresh one. In this way the relay could move something hundreds of miles in one calendar day. The Pony Express managed news of a US election from one coast to the other in just over a week.

If you can't use relays human and horse performance seem pretty similar, dozens of miles per day but not hundreds. The horse's top speed is higher, but it is rapidly exhausted, fast gaits like the canter are too exhausting to sustain for hours at a time.

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

#188

Post by CydeWeys » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #176

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Give the world-champions each a copy of AlphaGo on equal computers. Have them play Go against each other WITH computer assistance. Two problems with this plan: (1) the best players at human vs. human Go are likely not as good at playing on a human/computer team, and (2) it may be that the world champion human/computer team is the one that defers 100% to the computer, which seems uninteresting.

> (2) it may be that the world champion human/computer team is the one that defers 100% to the computer, which seems uninteresting. AlphaZero doesn't have any randomness built into it, does it? Which means I can build preparation against the lines of play AlphaZero would want to go down. I think you're underestimating the human, and also overestimating Google's laboratory experiment here. No one has really played "Cy…

AlphaZero uses Monte Carlo Tree Search. It definitely has randomness built in.

I'm with the other guy; I don't see how a person could make the AI play any better.

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

#189

Post by lisper » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:17 PM UTC

> "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," said Lee. "Even if I become the number one, there is an entity that cannot be defeated."

What a whiner. Quitting Go because you can't beat computers is like quitting track because you can't run faster than a car.

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

#190

Post by AllanHoustonSt » Wed, Nov 27, 2019, 7:17 PM UTC

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…

This is the current state of online poker. I enjoy it in the spirit of the game as a fan but it's definitely made earning potential and barrier of entry much higher. Poker stands on a net negative economy so the game is converging to a point of being unbeatable unfortunately.