Live data from Hacker News

AlphaGo's next move

deepmind.com

111–120 of 179 posts

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are being hyperbolic here. Go is in a lot of respect much more challenging than machine translation, speech to text and auto-driving. All of the latter problems you described have had solutions for decades whereas Alpha Go is literally state of the art. It even uses proprietary hardware (TPU's) and was essentially engineered by one if not the most elite ML lab in the world. Their solution consists of an e…

The author isn't hyperbolic. The problems that require what we call common sense continue to defeat all AI's. These board games don't require that. It comes down to pattern recognition, heuristic search, and good hardware. The examples of language and driving are great as the AI's only seem to do well on really narrow situations that require no greater understanding of context. And far as common sense, there's only a…

Modern AI, things like AlphaGo are examples of applied AI. "Common sense" falls within the realm of artificial general intelligence, which is a line of research that's largely abandoned now in favor of applied AI. Modern AI solutions are engineered to solve very very specific problems. You are never going to see attempts to teach "common sense".

https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08807

With that said, the above is what the world's AI researchers think is possible hopefully within my lifetime using just applied AI without the notion of "common sense".

Common sense is AGI. That's not the goal anymore. The goal is to do things like self driving cars. Both Google and Tesla have placed vehicles on the road that have driven for literally millions of miles.

The idea is to build a bunch of classifiers and regression models and use them together in an ensemble to solve your problem. The same approach is being applied successfully to a lot of unrelated fields where deep learning is concerned.

Also, modern AI doesn't even pretend to be biological in nature, in fact we'll known researchers like Andrew Ng make a point in saying that they are only biologically inspires and that's where the commonalities end.

There are other models like HTM that are way more ambitious and want to come up with a single generalized scheme to solve a broad range of problems, AGI style. These guys think biology is important and are trying to emulate the neocortex. They ARE going for AGI, common sense, etc.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#112

I remember vividly in 1997 when Deep Blue defeated Kasparov, and I was a competitive chess player. The mystique of the game was immediately lost for me, and I never found the passion for the game that I once had. My heart goes out to the sea of Go players now searching for meaning in the game. At the very least we can take this signal as a true indicator that our world is close to being completely upheaved by intelli…

There are several activities right now that people keep doing despite machines being better suited: martial arts (and more in point, HEMA[1]), handicrafts, several Olympic sports. Why would anyone attempt to run a marathon under two hours, when any car can do it in 30 minutes? I think the answer lies less in "I will be the absolute best", and more along the lines of "I will do it better than anyone before me". And so…

Your comparison seems a little off. Swordplay != gunplay, they're different games. Getting run over by a tank != judo, they're different games. There is a reason those games / martial arts / races have rules.

Whereas in Go, everyone's playing the same game by the same rules, the machines are just way better at it.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are being hyperbolic here. Go is in a lot of respect much more challenging than machine translation, speech to text and auto-driving. All of the latter problems you described have had solutions for decades whereas Alpha Go is literally state of the art. It even uses proprietary hardware (TPU's) and was essentially engineered by one if not the most elite ML lab in the world. Their solution consists of an e…

Autodriving has been solved for decades?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_autonomous_cars

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#114
post #77
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did announce that they would release a teaching tool which will show AlphaGo's analysis of Go positions, as well as the paper explaining how to build your own. Not only do you have the principle and the formula behind it, but also a little physics simulator tool! At this point, it is hard to complain.

> At this point, it is hard to complain. Actually, it's very easy to complain. If they released the model, people could generate arbitrarily many self-play games instead of depending on DM to release 50, could create arbitrarily many tools using the model instead of depending on DM to create and maintain a single tool, and could verify the results of training a clone based on even sketchy descriptions of the methods…

DeepMind's mission is to build AGI. I think it's probably good if they have a buffered lead on all other efforts. That concern probably weighs on decisions about releasing code.

The rationale for why a buffer would be good is described by Demis Hassabis here: https://youtu.be/h0962biiZa4?t=11m24s

...the main points are: there may be safety considerations along the way that are costly. More "capitalistic" organizations may decide to shortcut those costs because of the winner-take-all scenario. DeepMind is at least nominally very committed to safety.

Releasing AlphaGo's source code would probably reduce DeepMind's buffer, which in theory, would also reduce safety.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#115
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At this point, it is hard to complain. Actually, it's very easy to complain. If they released the model, people could generate arbitrarily many self-play games instead of depending on DM to release 50, could create arbitrarily many tools using the model instead of depending on DM to create and maintain a single tool, and could verify the results of training a clone based on even sketchy descriptions of the methods…

DeepMind's mission is to build AGI. I think it's probably good if they have a buffered lead on all other efforts. That concern probably weighs on decisions about releasing code. The rationale for why a buffer would be good is described by Demis Hassabis here: https://youtu.be/h0962biiZa4?t=11m24s ...the main points are: there may be safety considerations along the way that are costly. More "capitalistic" organization…

That would require some radically inconsistent thinking on their part. DM does occasionally release source code and trained models for other things, and the arms race logic (https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/Racing-to-the-pr...) would even more strongly argue for not releasing anything, even research (they're privately owned, they don't have to publish squat), and especially not running stunts like the AlphaGo tournament which cost millions of dollars in order to terrify and impress competitors and heat up the arms race.

A more parsimonious explanation is simply that it's great PR to maintain rigid control over the family jewels and dribble out occasional sample games and bits and pieces while pretending to be generous. (No one has ever accused Hassabis of being bad at PR or not knowing how to milk the media.)

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#116
post #99
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, people used to be considered geniuses for knowing a lot of things. This is still true, and in the eagerness to dismiss "memorization" as a thing of the past you overlook the obvious. For example, anything you care to know about, say, C++ programming or quantum field theory is available to you on the internet. But does that mean you can write a C++ program as if you had already learned it? What if you want to…

But you've just proven cocktailpeanuts point that its about the ability to use the knowledge, not simply recall it.

The ability to use knowledge does not come out of thin air. It is unlikely to find someone who knows how to program C++ extremely well, or solve problems in Quantum Field theory, but does not remember most of the language constructs or mathematical equations.

Continuous practice involves putting in the hours at practicing an art or a science, which by itself builds muscle memory about the language syntax/equations etc. It is unlikely that one can remember one but not the other.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, we are pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_versus_Horse_Marathon

pretty good at consistently losing to horses in running marathons? can't say i'm surprised.

Interestingly, it looks like the distance for this contest was shortened from a standard marathon to make it "more competitive". I wonder if anyone's explored the results at different distances? Perhaps the human would have a bigger advantage at longer distances. I'm not sure why they'd shorten the distance for the humans - a marathon is a standard distance that at least hundreds of thousands of people all over the world run just for fun. There even seems to be a pretty big community of ultra-marathoners that compete at distances several times greater than marathons, and over rough terrain too.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to be proven wrong but that hypothetical general AI is at least decades away in my humble opinion. It's not going to happen without many more students and researchers in the machine learning/AI field. Now would be a great time to join and make contributions.

> I'd love to be proven wrong but that hypothetical general AI is at least decades away in my humble opinion. I hope so. General AI is the source of dreams and nightmares, and I think it will take us decades just to adequately prepare for it from a safety & management perspective. > Now would be a great time to join and make contributions. Sincere question : short of embarking on a PhD, is AI research something the a…

Sincere question : short of embarking on a PhD, is AI research something the average dev (even a very, very enthusiastic one) can reasonably hope to contribute to?

Sure, why not? The nice thing about this field is that you don't need a lot of specialized and expensive equipment to work. The biggest obstacle in that regard comes in if you're doing some kind of model training where GPU's are the best choice, and you need (a) super-fast GPU(s) to do model training in a reasonable period of time. So you might want to spend a few thousand dollars on a fairly nice GPU setup.

But wait... even that can be outsourced to "the cloud" given that AWS, GCP, etc. make GPU instances available on an on-demand basis. Yeah, you have to be careful of how much cloud spend you rack up, but the point is that you don't necessarily need a huge up-front investment.

Even beyond that, AWS make FPGA instances available, so if you think you can design your own hardware level logic for doing something more efficiently, you can try that out in the cloud.

And GPU's aside, depending on exactly what you're doing (remember, AI is more than just Deep Learning) maybe you can get by with a basic Spark cluster or Beowulf cluster running MPI. Again, you can do this in your home for pretty cheap, or do it in the cloud.

As for the knowledge / know-how... sure, you'd have to dig in and do some serious catching up (that's the phase I'm in now). But the nice thing is, so much of the output of this field is online and freely available. No, not everything is, but a ton of the important stuff shows up on arXiv.org, or in free journals like JMLR or JAIR. There's also tons of historical stuff available to help get context or to mine for ideas that were prematurely abandoned, etc. Look at the CSAIL archives, or the IJCAI archives. Also, a lot, if not all, of the NIPS papers are freely available. Same for ICML and some others. See:

http://proceedings.mlr.press/

http://jmlr.org/

http://jair.org

http://nips.cc

http://publications.csail.mit.edu/ai/pubs_browse.shtml

https://www.ijcai.org/past_proceedings

https://arxiv.org/list/cs.AI/recent

http://arxiv.org/list/cs.LG/recent

http://arxiv.org/list/cs.MA/recent

http://arxiv.org/list/cs.NE/recent

etc.

Also consider that a significant portion of the important software used in this field is open source and freely available. I won't even try to list the stuff that's out there, but would instead direct your attention to http://mloss.org or Wikipedia (or Google) for some options to explore.

And of course there are forums where you can seek assistance from others, including:

https://discuss.openai.com/

http://stats.stackexchange.com

http://ai.stackexchange.com

http://datascience.stackexchange.com

http://artificial.reddit.com

http://machinelearning.reddit.com

etc.

The other thing that comes up is the need to know some maths stuff. Luckily the level of maths typically used in this field isn't that bad. You're not typically looking at needing Real Analysis, Abstract Algebra, Galois Theory, Topology, etc. A lot of AI/ML can be understood (from a mathematical POV) with just Calculus and Linear Algebra.

And if you don't already know those subjects, there are tons of online resources to help one learn them.

An interesting thing about AI/ML is that it's a very empirical subject. Not that there is no theory, but by and large you can come up with an idea for an approach to cognition / pattern matching that you think might work, and just go implement it, test it against existing approaches, and know if you've accomplished something.

Note that I'm not saying any of this is easy. Just that I think it's possible for somebody who's really motivated.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#119

I remember vividly in 1997 when Deep Blue defeated Kasparov, and I was a competitive chess player. The mystique of the game was immediately lost for me, and I never found the passion for the game that I once had. My heart goes out to the sea of Go players now searching for meaning in the game. At the very least we can take this signal as a true indicator that our world is close to being completely upheaved by intelli…

This reminds me of Iain Banks' Culture series, where society is ruled by super-intelligent AIs and drones with intelligence roughly equivalent to people. It isn't really a theme of the stories, more of an undercurrent, but there is an element of humans trying to figure out what their place and purpose is in a society where machines can do literally everything much better than they can.

Re: AlphaGo's next move

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several activities right now that people keep doing despite machines being better suited: martial arts (and more in point, HEMA[1]), handicrafts, several Olympic sports. Why would anyone attempt to run a marathon under two hours, when any car can do it in 30 minutes? I think the answer lies less in "I will be the absolute best", and more along the lines of "I will do it better than anyone before me". And so…

Your comparison seems a little off. Swordplay != gunplay, they're different games. Getting run over by a tank != judo, they're different games. There is a reason those games / martial arts / races have rules. Whereas in Go, everyone's playing the same game by the same rules, the machines are just way better at it.

It is less a matter of being better than everyonr else out there and more about the internal transformation that takes place. The more I had trained in martial arts and learned Sun Tzu (tldr: if you are not cheating, you are not trying hard enough), the more I realized that I did not really care that much for the narratives that used to drive me to train.

All the traditional martial arts went through that kind of identity crises. I have a friend who was ex military, practiced xingyi with me and Aikido; he tells me, in this day and age of drones, the idea that you are a walking badass because you know king fu is absurd. If that is the case, why keep going? My personal answer is that it has become about prevailing over myself (not about defeating others) ... and because it is fun.

The reactions among the Go world seems varied. Fan Hui said he learned a lot, and his own workd ranking shot up. After the first match, Ke Jie said he felt bitter, that these are going to be the last games he play against an AI. Yet he agreed to help Deepmind develop an analysis tool. Michael Redmond (one of the commentators) seems really excited in both the Lee Sedol matches and Ke Jie matches. A lot of Go pro players seems to feel more excited, not less, that AlphaGo is opening up possibilities. That the game has even furthur depths to explore.

For myself, I know I will never reach anywhere near the pro dan ranks in Go; I am not even sure I will reach the amature dan ranks. The journey to get where I am at, playing very informally, has helped me a lot with many other parts of my life. One of the biggest influences was practicing life-or-death and learning how my emotions affect my play. When I first started, I used to play moves because it felt safe, not because it was safe. Or I would respond locally because not doing so felt insecure. Reading through those positions helped me to not only read through what is there and the read my arising emotions at the time, that started to seep in other parts of my life. For example, my software programming style started changing. Lessons learned from making good shapes, capture races, living by making two eyes, false eyes -- all basic double-digit kyu stuff -- found their way into how I structure code, how to code less defensively, and a sharpening of my mental focus to read code that is actually there, not just what I think is there.

That change in myself is, I think, a better fruit of my effort.

Post reply on HN