Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…
Mastering Stratego
41–50 of 128 posts
Re: Mastering Stratego
#42Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…
AI remains better than humans at anything that has well defined rewards and small time gap between action and feedback mechanism (either naturally, like poker, or by value function engineering, like Go or Chess) The problem here is that it's missing the "glue" to more real world applications. This is where more humdrum software engineering comes in. Diplomacy in this is much more interesting than Stratego or beating…
This is a bold statement. The world does not function based on "well-defined rewards". The concept of "common sense", which some consider table stakes for a human operating competently in our world, is mostly made up of things which are neither well-defined, nor allow a tremendous amount of training data. Current ML approaches require both.
Re: Mastering Stratego
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW one of the big things poker AI taught humans is massive overbets (eg. going all in for $200 over a $15 pot). This is scary to do well in practice, because the mathematically optimal bluff frequency approaches 50% as you increase the overbet size.
Wow, that's crazy. It seems like it would be easier for AI to do, since it doesn't have any tells (it's easier to have a poker face when you don't have a face at all). I remember playing poker as a kid, and experimenting with pretending like my cards were good/bad with body language. I don't think that any professional players use that approach (they just have sunglasses and a straight face), but I wonder if AI could…
No poker bots yet I know of have developed "exploitative" strategies, where they deviate from the Nash Equilibrium strategy to exploit opponent mistakes.
Back when I played professionally (2012-2016, poker AIs being relevant in 2015/16) the standard was to use a bot to study the best default strategies and use expert human judgement to deviate from it against bad opponents.
Re: Mastering Stratego
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI remains better than humans at anything that has well defined rewards and small time gap between action and feedback mechanism (either naturally, like poker, or by value function engineering, like Go or Chess) The problem here is that it's missing the "glue" to more real world applications. This is where more humdrum software engineering comes in. Diplomacy in this is much more interesting than Stratego or beating…
> The problem here is that it's missing the "glue" to more real world applications. This is where more humdrum software engineering comes in. This is a bold statement. The world does not function based on "well-defined rewards". The concept of "common sense", which some consider table stakes for a human operating competently in our world, is mostly made up of things which are neither well-defined, nor allow a tremend…
But in general, yes, this is why since 2013 we don't see AI making anywhere as massive strides everywhere as they do in boxed-in applications like games.
Re: Mastering Stratego
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW one of the big things poker AI taught humans is massive overbets (eg. going all in for $200 over a $15 pot). This is scary to do well in practice, because the mathematically optimal bluff frequency approaches 50% as you increase the overbet size.
Wow, that's crazy. It seems like it would be easier for AI to do, since it doesn't have any tells (it's easier to have a poker face when you don't have a face at all). I remember playing poker as a kid, and experimenting with pretending like my cards were good/bad with body language. I don't think that any professional players use that approach (they just have sunglasses and a straight face), but I wonder if AI could…
You only use the "tell" when you believe there to be a pattern.
Otherwise, if it is truly random, I realize I can't get any info there and I ignore it, which then leads to me just having a straight face.
Re: Mastering Stratego
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW one of the big things poker AI taught humans is massive overbets (eg. going all in for $200 over a $15 pot). This is scary to do well in practice, because the mathematically optimal bluff frequency approaches 50% as you increase the overbet size.
Wow, that's crazy. It seems like it would be easier for AI to do, since it doesn't have any tells (it's easier to have a poker face when you don't have a face at all). I remember playing poker as a kid, and experimenting with pretending like my cards were good/bad with body language. I don't think that any professional players use that approach (they just have sunglasses and a straight face), but I wonder if AI could…
Re: Mastering Stratego
#47I remember my brother and I as kids playing Stratego and discovering the “impenetrable bunker of bombs” to put your flag in. Which evolved to “put a scout in as a ruse” and later “don’t actually enclose it because now brother just assumes it’s enclosed.”
Re: Mastering Stratego
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you tried this out yet? https://chat.openai.com/ It's been providing real value to me over the past day for practicing Spanish, explaining Machine Learning concepts, and doing fancy write-ups in LaTeX. And this one can't even use Google yet! (other research teams have already created models capable of doing so, it's only a matter of time until these innovations are brought together in one place)
That's a fancy wikipedia chatbot. Nothing to do with generalisation.
---
If you took the word "Wikipedia", and threw all the letters up in the air, what are some possible things they'd spell once they fell on the ground again?
If you took the word "Wikipedia" and threw all the letters up in the air, some possible things they could spell once they fell on the ground again might include "kawipieda," "keiapwidi," "kipedwaia," "pwakieida," or "eipawikid." However, without being able to see the exact arrangement of the letters on the ground, it's impossible to say for sure what they would spell.
---
(last sentence is a bit confused)
Re: Mastering Stratego
#49Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…
Re: Mastering Stratego
#50Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…
As others mentioned, AI is making headspace in enterprise and accounting, and achieving the “last mile” of human work. Better image recognition for handwritten forms and mail, better content and sentiment analysis for reducing spam, robot arm tasks which are more and more complex (yet still tame compared to humans)
“AI” hype is indeed overrated. If you think we’re close to reaching the singularity or anything resembling skilled human work you will almost certainly be disappointed. We probably have decades of slow improvement, more and more of these “breakthroughs” which aren’t really amazing compared to a human 5-year old, and aren’t really going to revolutionize industry, but will nonetheless have practical benefits