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

Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

wildml.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 132 posts

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#111

Post by gpm »

xfer wrote: post #104
blazespin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but the method of learning is interesting - unsupervised training in a VR world. As CPUs become faster, than these type of problems will fall much faster.

I am not sure it is completely unsupervised, iirc they said it was "coached". I don't think a bot can learn by itself to fake razes/perfect creep blocking by itself.

They talked about this twice, the exact text of both follows

> We didn't program it to understand the rules of Dota, we just let it play lifetimes of 1v1 against itself and coach it on what we thought was good or bad.

> We've coached it to learn just from playing against itself. We didn't hard code in any strategy. We didn't have it learn from human experts. Just from the very beginning it just playing against a copy of itself. It starts from complete randomness and then it makes very small improvements and eventually reaches the pro level. [... goes on to talk about how it's first "improvement" was to just never leave the base because it kept dying]

I think you're reading too much into the word coached. Particularly the second quote implies that it wasn't supervised at all.

My personal explanation for "Fake razes" is that it isn't a fake out to the bot, it's a technique to lower the casting time to zone out the opponent/hit faster if the opponent chooses to dives. Seems like a pretty easy trick to learn.

Creep blocking is just learning "positioning myself here (in front of the creeps) tends to improve my chances of winning", where "here" isn't far from where it would be positioning itself without creep blocking. It's a minor adjustment to the behavior with a substantial effect on the game outcome, of course it learned it.

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#112

Post by TrickyRick »

cthor wrote: post #94
thomasahle wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it hadn't been done before. They say they'll go for 5v5 next year, and if it wins I'm sure we'll move the goal posts further again.

I'll precommit to being very impressed if a bot can achieve >5k MMR in solo ranked or if a bot-controlled team wins a tier 6 (or higher) battle cup. When Checkers and Chess and Go pros were beaten by AI at the actual game , people were impressed, because it was impressive. (The goalpost moving involved claiming each consecutive game could not be solved.) I don't think anyone here is saying Dota 2 won't be solved even…

> I'll precommit to being very impressed if a bot can achieve >5k MMR in solo ranked or if a bot-controlled team wins a tier 6 (or higher) battle cup.

Me too but it will never happen. Granted I haven't played DOTA but I've played many other competitive mulitplayer games and they all require one thing which bots currently lack: Communication. A bot playing the entire 5 man team though, that's a different story!

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#113

Post by nbkvjones »

gdb wrote: post #42
nbkvjones wrote: post #25

there was a "discussion" on nadota.com about the bot and the semipro player that openai used to test chimed in. apparently the set of items the bot chose to purchase from was limited[1] and recommended by the semipro tester. As someone who knows next to nothing about ai, my question is this: the bot was announced on stage as blank slate, dumped into dota, and built entirely from grinding countless games against itsel…

(I work at OpenAI.) We'll have another blog post coming in the next few days. But as a sneak peek: we use self-play to learn everything that depends on an interaction with the opponent. Didn't need to with those that don't (e.g. fixed item builds, separately learned creep block).

That's good to hear.

There's probably a huge disconnect between what an AI engineer entails with a certain word and what the layman then comprehends. At the same time, I think we (nadota) probably latched onto certain words and downplayed the ones that would make it more impressive to us. Just a result of itching for information without there being much out there.

Really cool work, really glad you're doing it in dota, and eagerly awaiting your blog post.

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#115

Post by lttlrck »

Joeri wrote: post #88
goatlover wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the logic. Why should humanity go peacefully into oblivion with the advent of smarter than human machines? Do you feel like all the other species on this planet should have gone extinct with the arrival of homo sapiens? Your argument is that since B is better than A, only B should exist. But why can't both exist? And what makes your valuation of B objective and universal, such that our grandchildre…

Humanity currently is like a young child. We throw temper tantrums, make big messes and refuse to clean them up. We're terrible stewards of the earth and we serve no purpose as a species higher than existing and reproducing. We must grow up. But the fact that we're talking animals driven by primal urges makes this impossible through nurture alone. Either we change ourselves to the point of being a different species,…

Yet despite recognizing all these shortcomings we still have the arrogance to think we can create a better ‘human’? That would be a better steward without primal urges?

That’s distinctly human egotism.

I feel we would already have to change ourselves to the point of becoming a different species before we were even capable of successfully building such a being. At which point it would be moot.

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#116

Post by mannykannot »

gpm wrote: post #111
xfer wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure it is completely unsupervised, iirc they said it was "coached". I don't think a bot can learn by itself to fake razes/perfect creep blocking by itself.

They talked about this twice, the exact text of both follows > We didn't program it to understand the rules of Dota, we just let it play lifetimes of 1v1 against itself and coach it on what we thought was good or bad. > We've coached it to learn just from playing against itself. We didn't hard code in any strategy. We didn't have it learn from human experts. Just from the very beginning it just playing against a copy…

In this post, a member of the OpenAI team characterizes this form of coached self-play as being supervised. If you are assigning a value to an action that is not an explicit goal of the game and is not a consequence of violating the game's rules, it would seem to fit the definition of 'supervised'.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15002150

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#117

Post by gnaritas »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #78
gnaritas wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When should people attempt to regulate AI, when it's too late? Stopping a problem before it happens is called foresight. And if you pay attention to the press, it's not about killing us all, it's about disrupting the world, i.e. destroying jobs.

The reason I don't buy the "destroying jobs" argument is that we have tens of thousands of jobs just in the small country where I live that could be automated away by 1980s technology. For a US-specific example, look at the way you submit your taxes. That shit could be 99% automated away, like it is in many European countries already, and you have several large companies that would come crashing down, together with m…

Those jobs exist due to regulatory capture and the difficulty of changing tax law in a bitterly divided nation, just because a few industries found a way to use government to prevent progress and automation doesn't mean progress and automation isn't a danger; most industries won't be protected by regulatory capture. The "destroying jobs" thing is not an argument, it's a fact, it's what automation does, there's nothing to "buy", you either understand it or you don't.

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#118

Post by posterboy »

nbkvjones wrote: post #25

there was a "discussion" on nadota.com about the bot and the semipro player that openai used to test chimed in. apparently the set of items the bot chose to purchase from was limited[1] and recommended by the semipro tester. As someone who knows next to nothing about ai, my question is this: the bot was announced on stage as blank slate, dumped into dota, and built entirely from grinding countless games against itsel…

> is it reasonable

you ask the wrong question. Sure it's reasonable, noone's going to sue them

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#119

Post by AndrewKemendo »

lttlrck wrote: post #115
Joeri wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humanity currently is like a young child. We throw temper tantrums, make big messes and refuse to clean them up. We're terrible stewards of the earth and we serve no purpose as a species higher than existing and reproducing. We must grow up. But the fact that we're talking animals driven by primal urges makes this impossible through nurture alone. Either we change ourselves to the point of being a different species,…

Yet despite recognizing all these shortcomings we still have the arrogance to think we can create a better ‘human’? That would be a better steward without primal urges? That’s distinctly human egotism. I feel we would already have to change ourselves to the point of becoming a different species before we were even capable of successfully building such a being. At which point it would be moot.

I'd be curious how you define "better"

I feel we would already have to change ourselves to the point of becoming a different species before we were even capable of successfully building such a being

Well that's what the whole transhumanist movement is about - however it goes hand in hand with AGI. You can get there together in theory.

Re: Hype or Not? Some Perspective on OpenAI’s DotA 2 Bot

#120

Post by AndrewKemendo »

thinkfurther wrote: post #110
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I don't have it written out anywhere. I brought it up to test the waters somewhat and see what kind of response I would get. I'm hesitant to write it all out because I expect such a document would just be the source of opposition to implementation. Like putting war plans on the internet. If we make the progress we want I expect heavy opposition. However it's hard to build a movement in the shadows. I'd rather jus…

I'm not talking about perfection, I'm talking about not being covered in blood and shit so much of the time is all, about not being scared and driven. > You state the decoupling of psychological problems with some other undefined idealized personhood. Can you rephrase that? English isn't my first language, and "stating decoupling of" doesn't parse at all for me. It's like there's a sentence fragment missing. I can't…

Can you rephrase that?

Your argument is that we should collectively eliminate psychological problems. However it doesn't state what the idealized person would look like in such a scheme. Nor do I think you could probably do so without invoking what is effectively a deus ex machina - which would effectively be a better entity for which we could emulate, if only in theory. That entity I posit is the AGI.

Why wouldn't it just calculate whether the heat death of the universe will happen, and shut off if it comes to the conclusion it will? Nothing it would do would make a difference then.

What a fantastic result then! To have a more concrete proof of the Absurdist reality of our universe. This would be a great outcome to have such certainty around this problem. Indeed what if it calculated some universal existential problem like heat death and then turned itself off (aka suicide)?

No, it's their fault for not understanding what you're not even telling them.

As with most things. Few people understand, or even know of the Haber process and that it is the basis our entire society. Yet we exist in spite of our ignorance.

Post reply on HN