Live data from Hacker News

AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

youtube.com

341–350 of 428 posts

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#341
post #79

My (long) commentary here: https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154018209759228 Sample: At this point it seems likely that Sedol is actually far outclassed by a superhuman player. The suspicion is that since AlphaGo plays purely for probability of long-term victory rather than playing for points, the fight against Sedol generates boards that can falsely appear to a human to be balanced even as Sedol's probabili…

The problem with 'flag and footprints' demonstrations is precisely the same as their attraction - they are, in essence (even though that was not the intent), selected to be as misleading as possible about progress in solving the real problems.

We put a man on the moon, which encouraged decades of optimism about the near-future colonization of space... unfortunately it turns out we are nowhere near solving the hard problems associated with being able to live in space.

We spelled out the letters IBM in xenon atoms, five atoms tall, which encouraged optimism about near-future molecular manufacturing... unfortunately it turns out we are nowhere near solving the hard problems associated with making useful things with atomic precision.

We achieve superhuman performance in simple games, which encourages what should be optimism that becomes reflected by the distorting mirror of the zeitgeist of the times into pessimism, about near-future AI... unfortunately it turns out we are nowhere near solving the hard problems associated with making our tools something better than depressingly dumb.

In each case, the flurry of optimism turns as the decades pass into confusion, anger, soul-searching about why the expected follow-on progress has failed to materialize, fading slowly into despair, then into nothing as the optimists die of old age, one by one, and the rate of technological progress becomes slower with every passing decade. For this conversation is necessarily happening at a tech level that allows it, but that provides no guarantee whatsoever that the species that reached tech level X will proceed to tech level X+1. Moore's law has officially expired, and that was the last major area where we were making rapid sustained progress.

It's hard to say we shouldn't do 'flag and footprints' demonstrations; am I really willing to bite the bullet and say we shouldn't have put a man on the moon? I don't know the answer to that. I am, however, convinced that we should remember not to take them too seriously.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#342

Super interesting to watch this unfold. So what game should AI tackle next? I've heard imperfect information games are harder for AI...would the AlphaGo approach not work well for these?

One perfect-information game that's at least as hard: constructive mathematics. (Proof assistants even give it a sort of videogame-style UI.) I've been wondering about some kind of neural net for ranking the 'moves' coupled with the usual proof search.

I asked about this in /r/dependent_types yesterday. Apparently there's already a fair bit or research going on in this area. See the links: https://www.reddit.com/r/dependent_types/comments/49z1uc/usi...

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#343

Does anyone know if the AlphaGo team is saving the probability of winning assignments that AlphaGo gave its moves? It would be fascinating to see how early AlphaGo assigned very high probability of it winning. It would also be interesting to see if there were particular moves which changed this assignment a lot. For instance, are there moves that Lee Sedol made for which the win probability is very different for the…

In the introduction to the third match, the project lead talked about how Alphago evaluated the controversial 37th move in the second match. Apparently the policy network decided that it had a one in 10,000 chance of a human making that move, But the value network overrode this. So it seems like they are recording this kind of data and looking at it in cases where it's interesting.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#344
All this excitement makes me want to learn a little bit about those algorithms. I don't know anything about neural networks (but I've already implemented a chess game a while ago). Would it be difficult to implement a similar algorithm for a simpler game?

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#345
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consider GO: it is a game of sophisticated intuition It's still a game that can be described in terms of clear state-machine rules. The real challenge for AI is making sense and acting in the real world, which can't be described in such way. I consider advances in self-driving cars much more interesting in that sense - even if, even there, there are at least some rule-based constraints that can be applied to simpli…

Yeah, I think it's accurate to say that driving a car is harder in some sense than playing Go, based on the fact that the AI for Go came first. A lot of people have been working on self-driving cars for a long time now, and it's very monetizable, unlike Go.

Also, it should be noted that in Go, we're trying to beat the BEST human player, and have done so. In driving, we're just trying to be "good enough" or safe enough -- it doesn't have to be the safest driver in the world.

Beating the average human Go player was probably accomplished decades ago, whereas it's not even clear if we're safer than the average human driver (under all conditions).

These tasks are just wildly different, and yes I think it's basically all due to the fact that Go's state is so easily represented by a computer, and the goal is so concrete.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#346
post #79

My (long) commentary here: https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154018209759228 Sample: At this point it seems likely that Sedol is actually far outclassed by a superhuman player. The suspicion is that since AlphaGo plays purely for probability of long-term victory rather than playing for points, the fight against Sedol generates boards that can falsely appear to a human to be balanced even as Sedol's probabili…

I think this is one of the most fascinating (and disturbing) facts about AI: they seek to solve the problem they are given without being dependent on convention. They are completely alien in this regard, so many of their choices don't make any sense to us. This results in huge possibility but also the huge dangers that people worry about.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not truly artificial if it's using a human playbook. (Is the problem posed by the parent, I believe.)

What is 'truly artificial'? Neural networks are modeled after biological systems to begin with, I don't the that's a meaningful concept at all.

Truly artificial means not using meatspace metaphors for reasoning like human players do.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not truly artificial if it's using a human playbook. (Is the problem posed by the parent, I believe.)

What is 'truly artificial'? Neural networks are modeled after biological systems to begin with, I don't the that's a meaningful concept at all.

Well, we can extend that to say the biological systems are self-assembled randomly and selected through evolutionary algorithms, starting from random molecules on the sea floor.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol 3-0 [video]

#349
post #135
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is reminding me more and more of the central theme of the book Echopraxia, which was that when dealing with superhuman intelligences, you are by definition not smart enough to even know whether you're winning.

When I play chess against a computer I can see very easily that I'm not winning.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN