Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Number of Legal 18x18 Go Positions Computed; 19x19 On the Horizon

Posted by timothy on from the now-we'll-call-it-gone dept.

johntromp writes It took about 50,000 CPU hours and 4PB of disk IO, but now we know the exact number of legal 18x18 Go positions. Seeking computing power for the ultimate 19x19 count. And it's not a heat-death-of-the-universe kind of question, either, they say: "Thanks to the Chinese Remainder Theorem, the work of computing L(19,19) can be split up into 9 jobs that each compute 64 bits of the 566-bit result. Allowing for some redundancy, we need from 10 to 13 servers, each with at least 8 cores, 512GB RAM, and ample disk space (10-15TB), running for about 5-9 months."

186 comments

  1. How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How many cryptocoins could be mined for that amount of computing power?

    1. Re:How Much Does it Cost? by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

      More interestingly, how many crypto exchanges could be hacked and the mined coins stolen by that amount of effort.

    2. Re:How Much Does it Cost? by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      Not that many, the general purpose cpus are poorly suited to cryptocurrency and the low core count would hamper the number of threads.
      Either thread heavy GPU's, incredibly cheap SOC's or well suited FPGAs return much more coin for the buck than what they are asking for here

      If you went to Dell for this, it would run just under $200k (list price, using local disk), but there is probably an awful lot of suitable gear that is being aged out or abandoned by bankrupt companies out there that could be picked up for far less

      What is the financial interest is solving this?

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    3. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does there need to be a financial incentive to solve it?

    4. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To justify the cost of the hardware?

    5. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, then what is the 'benefit' of solving this?

      Fame, better game design. pursuit of knowledge?

      Just saying that if you want to get donations for a pile of computing power, it is helpful to know how much it will cost and what the selling point to the donors is

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    6. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      And what exactly is the financial incentive to solve the number of 19x19 Go positions?

    7. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no clue, which is kind of the original question posed by gary is a busy boy...

    8. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many man hours of humanity have been spent on this game? What if the whole thing is solvable? Kind of eye opening to our significance in the world. More power to these dreamers.

      To me, there has to be an ROI. Good thing there are many types of people with different motivations in this world I suppose.

    9. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      dont think of ROI in a negative context here. the researchers are invested in learning more about the world and sharing this knowledge and this is what they want. they're not looking to "monetize it". a better question is, why would somebody pay $200k to solve this problem?

    10. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, $200k seems a bit steep. I mean, if it was for national defense, pushing data against the stock market, or even running a moderately sized corporation's ERP stack it would be a totally acceptable expenditure

      It is an interesting problem to posit how it would be possible to get the same gear for a fraction of the cost, say 10%, or $20k

      This may seem wildly optimistic, but in the dot-com meltdown I remember seeing gear with million dollar price tags going for $10k on ebay

      The chassis, processors, and potentially even disk arrays may be easily obtained. I have worked at companies where they were shoved out the loading dock door on a monthly basis, because newer gear had smaller footprints and we could stuff ten times as many processors or terabytes into the same constrained space that we were stuck with

      RAM may be a problem since they are asking for 512GB per machine. This would probably be in 32GB sticks, which are as easily traded as gold, and even if a company was shit-canning them, the more enterprising techs should be expected to be grabbing them at every opportunity

      The common nexus for this gear would be the computer salvage companies that get paid to haul it away and make a secondary profit off of reselling what they can. How would these go-crackers find a salvage company with similar leanings? If that connection could be made, they may get away with it for the discounted cost of re-sold RAM

      Which leads us to the next issue, supplying 15KW of juice to run these on, the additional power to pull that heat out of the space and enough battery supply to handle a power outage without losing your entire data set. In the corporate world, this is another $50k of Liebert gear and a diesel generator. And your gonna have somebody on-call to monitor, tune and otherwise tend to their wants and needs...

        in cheapo-town... this could be a garage and a stack of deep-cell batteries with the over-worked go-crackers reheating pizza on the top of a server

      I think that it is an interesting exercise to figure out how to deliver a half-million dollar hardware solution for next to nothing, anybody else have their 2-bits to throw at it?

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    11. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      Fair enough, then what is the 'benefit' of solving this?

      Guessing they needed to heat their apartment and having the server run flat-out for 9 months helped - a lot.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    12. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our local compute cluster has 512 GB compute nodes. They have 32 slots with 16 GB each, but they are a couple of years old. New compute nodes will probably have 2-4 TB per node.

    13. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you justify the cost of a book, movie tickets, money spent on vacation travel or, going further, a degree that's not an engineering degree? Because if you run your numbers, there's no financial reason for any of those things.

    14. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      What was the financial incentive for Deep Blue and champion chess programs?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    15. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      When I started playing go, somewhere around 1987/1989, there was a price money offered for the first computer program that was able to beat a 1st Dan go player.
      The price was a million dollars. It took decades until one managed to write such a program and farm in the price money.
      I'm pretty certain we have a new price for a program beating a 4th Dan.
      Someone with a better internet connection than I have right now, might want to google for that.
      A go implementation that is somewhere around between 1st and 2nd Dan is: http://fuego.sourceforge.net/ (there is also a free iPad version of it)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    16. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      What was the financial incentive for Deep Blue and champion chess programs?

      PR for IBM, plus they did actually play chess with it, not just calculate the potential number of games.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    17. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      How do you justify the cost of a book, movie tickets, money spent on vacation travel or, going further, a degree that's not an engineering degree? Because if you run your numbers, there's no financial reason for any of those things.

      Yes, there is absolutely no financial reason to be a doctor, lawyer, accountant, architect, dentist, vet, banker, real estate agent, marketer, economist, fashion designer, Army General, rock star, Hollywood actor, actuary, quantity surveyor...they're all just hobbies rather than jobs where you can earn any money.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    18. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      I'm *assuming* (and you know what happens when you assume) that getting a grasp of the total number of positions will provide Go game designers needed information in making more powerful programs. Right now the Go programs are terrible (in comparison to Chess).

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    19. Re:How Much Does it Cost? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

      Instead of going to Dell, why not use Amazon EC2? Probably do it way cheaper and you could set it up in a couple hours.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    20. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      Just knowing the total number of positions doesn't really do much. It's just a huge combinatorics problem. Knowing the number of positions doesn't tell you much about which positions are good or bad, or even which ones are likely to happen in an actual game. I guess it gives you some idea of the problem space for solving the game, but that doesn't get you very far. We already knew the problem space is extremely huge. I don't think that standard methods or computing all the possible moves like we did with checkers or chess are the right way to go about it. On a 19x19 board, there are 361 choices for the first move. and for the second move there are 360 options. That's 129000 possible combinations for the first 2 moves. Mind you, many of those are symmetrical, but it's still a large number of positions. Compare that to checkers where the are 16 possible 2 move openings, and chess, where there are 100 possible 2 move openings, many of which we know are almost never used in competition play. Attacking go using the same strategies as chess seems like it would just lead nowhere.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    21. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there is absolutely no financial reason to be a doctor, lawyer, accountant, architect, dentist, vet, banker, real estate agent, marketer, economist, fashion designer, Army General, rock star, Hollywood actor, actuary, quantity surveyor...they're all just hobbies rather than jobs where you can earn any money.

      I guess you didn't study finance. Sure, you can make a lot of money if you nail one of the good jobs in those fields, but as a long term financial strategy all those lose to engineering. The best financial bet is studying engineering. Your chance of getting a higher paying job sooner investing way less resources is better than any other job. In other words, it has a better ROI. Of course, you can devote your life to gambling. Some people make insane amounts of money out of gambling (you can make millions in one week if you buy the winning lottery ticket), but most will lose. It's an extreme case but you get the idea: financially, only one option is the good option. Nevertheless, people do all sort of things for a variety of reasons.

    22. Re: How Much Does it Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8 pawns with 2 moves each, 2 nights with 2 moves each, for 20 moves per ply, so a total of 400 variants for one full move

    23. Re:How Much Does it Cost? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      What is the financial interest is solving this?

      It's Go ; it's more important than mere finance.

      There is a ha-ha-but-serious school of thought about Go that it's not a matter of life and death, but something much more important. You'd be harder-tested to find a room full of Go players who could meaningfully give an opinion on whether Go was more important than the heat death of the universe. I suspect that given such qualified people, you'd get an affirmative on the question.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. I know it is a bit late in life... by KGIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

    However, I think I'd like to learn to play this game. I played chess at an amateur level and did rather well at it during and even after college. I don't know if any of the skills transfer but I've been told that the mentality transfers. Being able to look a half dozen or more moves ahead and being able to picture all the moves my opponent can make are, as I have been told, something that does transfer.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    1. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I played chess and go when I was a kid in China, and sucked at both. From my limited experience, chess is more tactical and analytic, while go is more strategic and holistic, although local territorial fights in go can be just as intense, where skills in chess can somewhat "transfer". Because of its holistic nature, kids sometimes excel in go. If you start as an adult, it'd be difficult, if not impossible to attain master level performance. But in any case, go is trivial to learn and more fun to play. Best of luck.

    2. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I played chess and go when I was a kid in China, and sucked at both.

      There are approximately 100 people in the world who don't suck at chess, and even they make silly mistakes. Don't play chess in an effort to be the 'best', play chess because it's fun.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Having played both nothing transfers. The strategy level is different. Go is about unit formations and patterns. Chess is about unit tactics. There is a Japanese equivalent to Chess i.e. Shogi.

    4. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by MichaelMacDonald · · Score: 4, Funny

      My problem isn't seeing ahead by quite a few moves. I, actually, am quite skilled at that, I can look well ahead of the current turn, figure out what the best possible strategy would be in my current situation, and do it fairly quickly. My issue is a bit different. It seems that the game itself is, actually, extremely boring, and when I start thinking about something more interesting - like porn, or popcorn - I manage to completely forget all those moves I foresaw so brilliantly, and make the absolute worst possible move I could have made instead. Then the game ends quicker, and I can go make some popcorn and watch porn. Which isn't so bad, really, in the end.

    5. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Funny

      Having played both nothing transfers. The strategy level is different. Go is about unit formations and patterns. Chess is about unit tactics.

      I can play both at an intermediate level, and I agree with this. The mentality is very different. If you are starting as an adult, you are very unlikely to ever be a master, but you can easily learn the game well enough to have fun. Go has a handicapping system that allows for competitive games between people with a wide skill gap. Besides, Go tournaments, like chess tournaments, and model railroading conventions, are a great place to meet chicks.

    6. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Garridan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Damn, if only I had mod points. I'm so happy to be aware of your curiosity surrounding GP's chess skills, interest in Go, and metal capacity. I was wondering if anybody else had been wondering these things about GP, but had been afraid to ask if I was the only one. Your post has given me validation, and I now have a reason to live to see tomorrow. What a wonderful and supportive community we have here. Keep up the good work, anonymous champion!

    7. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There are online Go games. Try one out. Google will show you some. I would start with a 5x5 board until you get the hang of it.

    8. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Chess is a battle. Go is a war.

    9. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Play chess because it's fun."

      That that's the case, chess never gets pulled from the game closet over the other games I own...

    10. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Gorgeous, and frustrated, chicks. Chicks who just wanna go have a beer.

      --
      I come here for the love
    11. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      It is kind of like the difference between playing a Total War game vs X-COM but only worse.

    12. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, if only I had meta-mod points. I'm ecstatic that we're all having such a good time here. I was afraid that you and Mr. Coward weren't going to get along, and now we have this wonderful bonding experience! I think we need a group hug! Group hug everybody? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

      Man, I just—I just love all you guys so much. *sniff* d'awwww....

    13. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by shadowofwind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Chess mentality doesn't transfer very well to go in my observation. Since go has vastly more plausibly good moves, chess players often find themselves not understanding how to choose where to go next. Most people I've known who like go a lot hate chess. I've known one person who likes both, and he was never able to get very good at go. Generally speaking, chess can be learned by someone who can think logically and learn the standard opening sequences. Go is more like painting. Its not necessarily a superior skill, but not all intellectually-smart people are smart in the right way.

      But by all means learn, its easy to get a game on the internet. If you like it its worth it. And if you do it for ego and discover you suck, sometimes that's worth something too.

    14. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet they have computed and continue to compute a significant portion of the entire board play. Unlike chess.

    15. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Chess: the game of kings.

      Go: the king of games. :-)

    16. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by JanneM · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To be honest, as a kid I enjoyed chess and played with my friends right up to the point where you suddenly had to start memorizing openings and other canned sequences. At which point it felt more like a school subject than an escape from it.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    17. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by EmeraldBot · · Score: 2

      Chess is a battle. Go is a war.

      I'm all out of mod points, but this is an excellent summary of the difference.

      --
      "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
    18. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by VerdantHue · · Score: 1

      Pick up a copy of "Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go" by Toshiro Kageyama. My favorite go book.

    19. Re: I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm so smart that I can't take my mind off porn and popcorn."

      I'm glad I'm not as smart as you.

    20. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by anagama · · Score: 2

      Ignoring the assholes making fun of you for being interested and explaining why, you can start learning right now:

      igs: http://pandanet-igs.com/commun...
      kgs: https://www.gokgs.com/

      I know you can play the Gnu Go Server on kgs, if you want to avoid playing with a person for a while. You can also install it on your computer: https://www.gnu.org/software/g...

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    21. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by WinstonWolfIT · · Score: 2

      You never needed to memorize. Push toward a position you're comfortable with, especially if you happen to know your opponent prefers a different type of position. An open player can f2f4 in a complicated position which can be very jarring and put the opponent into time trouble simply because he wants to figure out what you think you see. Or g2g3 and locked pawns can frustrate the hell out of an open player. At my absolute best I was 1800, and I memorized very very little. You're no Fischer and I'm no Capablanca so theory at the B-A levels doesn't mean anywhere near as much as positional awareness.

    22. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think of hanging out with friends or going and getting a beer.
      those things with other people ..

    23. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have to agree with this. I loved chess as a little kid -- probably started playing when I was 4 or so. Always just played for fun and liked the way it was more complex than something like checkers. I also occasionally enjoyed puzzling out some of those chess puzzles in the newspaper, which usually involved endgame scenarios. But then, early in middle school, I played against someone who actually "knew what he was doing," which included things like memorized openings, basic tactics, and canned strategies. He was kinda dumb but nonetheless beat me handily. I spent a month or two learning openings and such, and suddenly I could beat most of my friends (including those quite a bit older) pretty consistently too, just from the improved board positions.

      At that point I realized that becoming a "real chess player" was very different from the fun I'd been having, and I completely lost interest. I've only played a handful of times since, mostly because it's really hard to have any fun playing with my knowledge -- not enough to play "real chess" against anyone who studied strategy, but too much to play against the people who know the basic rules but never learned that stuff.

      I admire the grandmasters, because they have both that amazing set of memorized knowledge AND the incredible logic/intuition. But I have absolutely no desire to play the game anymore because while I'm somewhat interested in the latter, I can't be bothered with the former. It's permanently ruined for me.

    24. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by chipschap · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm bad at Go (about 19k AGA, which is quite bad), but I really enjoy it. The Go community differs radically from the chess community. My experience (yours may vary) is that the Go community is more supportive, understanding, and genteel. There's a lot of tradition and protocol in Go and I think it means something.

      You can be a clueless beginner (the writer raises his hand), go to a club (or online) and almost always find someone willing to give you a teaching game. If there is a club in your area, meeting some other players is a giant plus, but there are many great online sites.

      I play for fun, which is the best reason, and I enjoy it immensely. Will I improve? Of course. Will I ever excel? No, but that's not the point for me.

    25. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel ya pain brotha :)

    26. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      By the way... I should clarify that I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who play at "my level"... And if I were into playing games on the internet, etc., I'm sure I could find them. But I learned chess on a real board before computer chess was common, and I always played it as a casual social experience... And I just don't have the desire to go looking for opponents at my level. Anyhow, my point was my perception of the game changed radically when I became aware of certain bits of classic strategic patterns.

    27. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are approximately 100 people in the world who don't suck at chess

      that is very relative. At least 100 people around me do not suck @chess.

    28. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll have to quote that, if I may. I pretty quickly gave up chess after stumbling upon a Go club. I've also noticed that Go players are generally eager to teach, and that the handicap system permits a much broader spectrum of skill level compatibility than does chess. So aside from being the King, it is actually a more socially firendly game, or more inclusive / less exclusive than chess.

    29. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      Just wondering if you ever tried Chess 960?

    30. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      "fun"?

      easy for you to say

      then you lose to your little sister

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    31. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      lol I would love to lose to my little sister.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    32. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Much thanks. I will start this evening I think.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    33. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To both AthanasiusKircher and JanneM, you should try out Go then. I enjoy it far more than Chess in that there is less blind memorization of openings. There are "joseki," but those are only common patterns and memorizing them doesn't help an insane amount at low-to-mid levels (especially as when the opponent doesn't follow the pattern those who only have memorized the joseki will find themselves in trouble). I enjoy it a lot more because for me, there is more "thinking about how the game works" and less "memorize Queen's Gambit to 30 moves out."

      The other good thing about Go is that skill scales really well (there are well established handicap systems which unlike chess don't fundamentally change the way the game is played), and you can find a fun game pretty at any skill level. There isn't a "no-man-land" like AthanasiusKircher describes. If you start getting hardcore for a while then give up on it, you can still find others who are a fair challenge to play against.

    34. Re: I know it is a bit late in life... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      "I'm so smart that I can't take my mind off porn and popcorn."

      I'm glad I'm not as smart as you.

      Well it's for sure you're not as funny.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    35. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      I once lost a game of chess to a guy who was partially stoned, and who didn't know the complete ruleset. Yes, I'm that sloppy.

      That said, I once did beat the reigning extended family chess player with a very very risky move that required me to sacrifice my queen and have a couple moves after that. Very risky. That's my fave fame of pretty much anything ever because of that.

    36. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      as a kid I enjoyed chess and played with my friends right up to the point where you suddenly had to start memorizing openings and other canned sequences.

      The world champion doesnt do this... prior champions certainly have but the current one isnt looking hard for an advantage in the opening...

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    37. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      I once lost a game of chess to a guy who was partially stoned

      Probably because he was stoned. The downsides to being high, as it relates to chess, can be managed.. while the upside remains.

      (the downside is that you are more prone to overlook things, the upside is that you can focus quite well on specific things.. "wide" vs "deep")

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    38. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      I manage to completely forget all those moves I foresaw so brilliantly, and make the absolute worst possible move I could have made instead.

      In chess thats called Kotov Syndrome

      In Kotov's 1971 book Think Like a Grandmaster, he described a situation when a player thinks very hard for a long time in a complicated position but does not find a clear path, then running low on time quickly makes a poor move, often a blunder.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    39. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Nukenbar · · Score: 1

      This is how I felt learning a rubix cube.

      It was really cool learning how to solve it, but learning all of the more efficient way to do it just took the fun out of it for me.

    40. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by houghi · · Score: 1

      I larned it when I was at school.. The teacher whom I was playing against told me that I could not win and should give up. I didn't and he started to take every piece one by one. When I only had a king, I was unable to make a move, so instead of losing, it was a draw.

      I was the first kid not losing against him and he was pissed. Probably for being so smug.

      I learned more about people then I did about the game and regardsless of being the best at school, I never really liked the game amd I feel I never have been able to look further than 2 moves and never learned any openings.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    41. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      err...what? (does google image search of chess conventions) ummm...what? The only images that have girls in them at all, much less at as anywhere near a third or more of the population, are images for cosplay where they're playing "human chess" at a convention. The conventions actually for chess...not so much.

    42. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      I know it's a bit late in life, but I was thinking about learning how to make mead. I know it's a bit late in life, but I was thinking about training to run a marathon. I know it's a bit late in life, but I met this woman and we've decided to get married...

      You don't have to be the world's best at something, just to do it at all. There's a certain generation of geeks I guess that grew up playing particular games (modern warfare and the like) where those who weren't in the top tier would have a hard time having much fun at all playing with those who were - but that's not how most of life works. Do something for enjoyment and for enrichment, not to be the best at it. Extreme capitalism doesn't have to apply to anything, much less your everyday life.

    43. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      included things like memorized openings, basic tactics, and canned strategies.

      I believe the solution for this is called "Fisher Random".

    44. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by gregor-e · · Score: 1

      Presumably, that's because all the gorgeous and frustrated chicks are out-of-frame, enjoying a beer.

    45. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love the shaggy dog story.

    46. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      ah, well, I hadn't factored that in - you must be correct, that's likely what is occurring.

    47. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From my understanding in chess you fight one battle. In Go you fight several battles at once where the side effects of one battle can change the outcome of another battle. In Go you gain tempo by forcing your opponent to respond to your threats. They my block your threat but the side effect of your attack gives you some bennifit. If your threat is not strong enough you will be ignored an your opponent will take the initiative away from you.

    48. Re:I know it is a bit late in life... by MisterMonday · · Score: 1

      I will respectfully disagree with this. While it's reasonable to say something like "the strategies and goals are different," saying "nothing transfers" is just an indication that you're not thinking broadly enough. Both require focus, the ability to remain calm and predict moves in tense situations (or as tense as things get, depending on how seriously you're willing to take any individual game), a love of thinking and games, a degree of patience, and the willingness to persevere for any hope of actual improvement. And as much as you could claim that those are all self-evident, not all of them are. Both Chess and Go, while DRASTICALLY different in play style, strategy, and objective, share a lot of common requirements in order for serious improvement and enjoyment, which doesn't translate to other things. Just because they're both strategy board games doesn't mean things translate as easily - after all, not to be disparaging, but you can't say the same thing about something like Checkers. In fact, while the objective in checkers is much more similar to chess than that of Go, it is Go that requires a lot more of the same things. That definitely speaks to something.

  3. doesn't sound like the game should be called go by electrosoccertux · · Score: 2

    we need from 10 to 13 servers, each with at least 8 cores, 512GB RAM, and ample disk space (10-15TB), running for about 5-9 months

    sounds pretty slow to me

    1. Re:doesn't sound like the game should be called go by infolation · · Score: 1

      4PB of disk IO

      How many Libraries of Kokuritsu Kokkai Toshokan is that?

    2. Re:doesn't sound like the game should be called go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we need from 10 to 13 servers, each with at least 8 cores, 512GB RAM, and ample disk space (10-15TB), running for about 5-9 months

      sounds pretty slow to me

      Also sounds like quite a resource hog for an 18x18 board game with way fewer rules than chess. Why the Hell do you need 512 GB of RAM and 10-15TB of disk space to do 1/9th of the calculation?

    3. Re:doesn't sound like the game should be called go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      please, how much bennett haselton posts is one Kokuritsu Kokkai Toshoka?

    4. Re:doesn't sound like the game should be called go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we need from 10 to 13 servers, each with at least 8 cores, 512GB RAM, and ample disk space (10-15TB), running for about 5-9 months

      sounds pretty slow to me

      I know why. I looked at the code. There's a link near the bottom of the linked page for a tar file. Needs someone with some MPI or GPGPU programming experience to rewrite some of it. They just need some better parallelization than spawning a bunch of local processes and writing ridiculous amounts of data to disk. Honestly might be a couple weeks worth of spare-time work for someone who has the time and some MPI or CUDA/OpenCL chops.

    5. Re:doesn't sound like the game should be called go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Chess is played on a 8x8 board, so already you have a much larger board with its exponential increase in moves.

      Chess has the benefit of a restricted set of moves per piece.

      The fewer rules make it harder to store valid board arrangements.

    6. Re:doesn't sound like the game should be called go by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      it might sound like an exercise in how much CPU can we tie up for no discernible reason, but it does have applications in encryption and chaotic systems analysis, a lot of which is directly related to the actual calculation being discussed.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  4. Energy wasted on brute force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Work on P = NP instead.

    1. Re: Energy wasted on brute force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no way to bruteforce P = NP isn'it ?

      We just need a genius to work on it for 10 years.

    2. Re: Energy wasted on brute force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nobody who can solve it would make it through grad admissions and faculty hiring and then tenure. at some point they'll get weeded out because it's all about quantity over quality.

    3. Re: Energy wasted on brute force by Fwipp · · Score: 2

      Sure we can brute-force it, we'll just spit out a whole bunch of random machine code, and check each set to see if it solves the boolean satisfiability problem, and then see if it solves it in polynomial time. This approach just depends on P == NP being true in order to work. :)

    4. Re: Energy wasted on brute force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny, unlike some engineering and physical science fields, math has no shortage of papers that are dozens, if not over hundred pages long. I've done physics work where I get told I should at least publish short updates if working on something big, while with math, I can wait until I have a large, complete picture.

    5. Re: Energy wasted on brute force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice, well thought. :)

    6. Re: Energy wasted on brute force by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There's no way to bruteforce P = NP isn'it ?

      We just need a genius to work on it for 10 years.

      I've been working on it for 10 minutes, and it's patently obvious that P=NP when N=1, since 1 x anything is anything.

      Not quite sure what all the fuss is about.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  5. So what's the end goal of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Being able to have 'rainbow table' level cheating at go? What's the application here?

    1. Re:So what's the end goal of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      hey man, don't be a prick

      go is super interesting from a formalistic perspective given that it has an extremely large amount of emergent behavior.

      that is, the rules are so simple, that it should really be as easy to analyze as connect 4

      but its likely the most complicated full-information game created by man

      so, no, the exactly number isn't particularly interestingbut give the guy a break. 'mathematical go' by berlekamp is pretty
      boring and trite and focusses on some really uninteresting endgame positions. but he tried to get a handle on things.

      john tromp, one of the contributing authors, has made some very cool contributions on the solvability of go, the exact nature
      of the rulesets, various automated processes for studying go positions, library software for keep track of the best human move
      in a given position, etc etc.

      so stfu

    2. Re:So what's the end goal of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hey man, don't be a prick" Strike that, reverse it. You're the prick of the two of us, I just asked what the application was for such a computational task? Go mastery?

      It's an algorithmic environment like any other you could design, but it IS established. I'm not dissing anything, you are. Bitch.

    3. Re:So what's the end goal of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hey man, don't be a prick" Strike that, reverse it.

      Is it worth it? I put my stone down, flip it and reverse it.

    4. Re:So what's the end goal of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so stfu

    5. Re:So what's the end goal of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go is unlikely to be the most complicated perfect-information game created by man. (It might be one of the most popular though.

        If you like chess, but would like to play a game which is not yet mastered by computers, you might want to look into Arimaa ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... ) This game is designed to be easy to pick up for a human but to be difficult to master for a computer. It can actually be played with a normal chess set if you really want to, so the entry for playing is pretty low (and even lower if you are satisfied with a computer based game of course).

  6. An amazing accomplishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yippppppeeeeeee!!!!!! to our Go experts!!!!!!!!!!!

  7. My two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I also took chess quite seriously for a few years, reaching approximately 1800. The pervasiveness of rote openings discouraged me a bit, but I always loved the game and still do. However, I abandoned it for Go, where I hold a shameful but enjoyable rating of 6-7kyu. I have never found any aspect of Go, other than scarcity of oponents , worth complaining about. It is, perhaps, the world's only perfect game. Just remember to lose your first 50 games as quickly as possible. Afterwards, expect a lifelong companion.

  8. Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here is the number of legal positions:
    6697231142888292128927 401888417065435099377 8064017873281031833769694562442854721810521 43260127743713971848488909701 11836283470468812827907149926502 347633

    Why they chose to present it like that, instead of scientific notation, I'll never know but there it is. It's so long Slash-filter won't let me post it without adding spaces.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ~6.6972e+152

    2. Re:Number of legal positions by JanneM · · Score: 5, Funny

      Here is the number of legal positions:
      6697231142888292128927 401888417065435099377 8064017873281031833769694562442854721810521 43260127743713971848488909701 11836283470468812827907149926502 347633

      Why they chose to present it like that, instead of scientific notation, I'll never know but there it is.

      I'm not quite clear how 6.697231142888292128 927401888417065435 099377806401787328 103183376969456244 285472181052143260 127743713971848488 909701118362834704 688128279071499265 02347633e151 is much of an improvement, to be honest.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    3. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Because now I know it's 151 digits. Had no idea before.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:Number of legal positions by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why they chose to present it like that, instead of scientific notation, I'll never know but there it is.

      This is a discrete mathematics problem. There are exactly that many positions. Not one more, not one less, with no measurement error nor variance. And the question they set out to answer was what precisely was this exact number. To not report the result in full would be absurd.

    5. Re:Number of legal positions by JanneM · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because now I know it's 151 digits. Had no idea before.

      How can you know I didn't just guess?

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    6. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Because you're not a meanie

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THAT is one SERIOUSLY BIG number..... Wonder how you'd express it in words... This is likely where that word "Googol" would be appropriate....

    8. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The important point is that it's an odd number. You can't get that from scientific notation.

    9. Re:Number of legal positions by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Probably because they could of estimated the answer of 7*10^152 by hand in an afternoon. They spends months to get the exact count, so they better show it.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    10. Re:Number of legal positions by JanneM · · Score: 1

      I might just be lazy, and 151 is a reasonable-size prime number :)

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    11. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6697231142888292128927 401888417065435099377 8064017873281031833769694562442854721810521 43260127743713971848488909701 11836283470468812827907149926502 347633

      Yipppppeeeeeee!!!!!!!

    12. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      could HAVE. could HAVE, not could OF. Get it right, damn it!

    13. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That is irrelevant, you can express exact numbers in scientific notation. 1.3454777 x 10 ^ 7 is an exact number, it's just a different way of writing it that makes it easier for a reader to understand.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    14. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would you, phantomfive, liked to have seen the result written out? Be specific.

    15. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      JanneM did ok.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, how about we represent it as could + some word x 10^0?

    17. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have exactly 2 feet.
      of 2.00000000 x 10^0

      kind of both mean the same thing

    18. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why they chose to present it like that, instead of scientific notation, I'll never know but there it is.

      Better than the word form:

      six hundred sixty-nine septenvigintillion, seven hundred twenty-three sexvigintillion, one hundred fourteen quinvigintillion, two hundred eighty-eight quattuorvigintillion, eight hundred twenty-nine trevigintillion, two hundred twelve duovigintillion, eight hundred ninety-two unvigintillion, seven hundred forty vigintillion, one hundred eighty-eight novemdecillion, eight hundred forty-one octodecillion, seven hundred six septendecillion, five hundred forty-three sexdecillion, five hundred nine quindecillion, nine hundred thirty-seven quattuordecillion, seven hundred eighty tredecillion, six hundred forty duodecillion, one hundred seventy-eight undecillion, seven hundred thirty-two decillion, eight hundred ten nonillion, three hundred eighteen octillion, three hundred thirty-seven septillion, six hundred ninety-six sextillion, nine hundred forty-five quintillion, six hundred twenty-four quadrillion, four hundred twenty-eight trillion, five hundred forty-seven billion, two hundred eighteen million, one hundred five thousand, two hundred fourteen

    19. Re:Number of legal positions by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Because the real answer is 6.697231e+152

      https://www.google.co.nz/searc...

    20. Re:Number of legal positions by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      JanneM also did it wrong.

    21. Re:Number of legal positions by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I have exactly 2 feet.
      of 2.00000000 x 10^0

      kind of both mean the same thing

      "Kind of" is correct.

      They are not exactly the same thing.

    22. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is the number of legal positions:
      6697231142888292128927 401888417065435099377 8064017873281031833769694562442854721810521 43260127743713971848488909701 11836283470468812827907149926502 347633

      Why they chose to present it like that, instead of scientific notation, I'll never know but there it is.

      I'm not quite clear how 6.697231142888292128 927401888417065435 099377806401787328 103183376969456244 285472181052143260 127743713971848488 909701118362834704 688128279071499265 02347633e151 is much of an improvement, to be honest.

      Unless you show how you calculated this, I don't buy it.

    23. Re:Number of legal positions by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      google being stupid again, you are wrong:
      "It is customary in scientific measurements to record all the definitely known digits from the measurements, and to estimate at least one additional digit if there is any information at all available to enable the observer to make an estimate."

    24. Re:Number of legal positions by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      1 Googol is in fact less than a 10^51-th of this

    25. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok then, represent that number exactly in scientific notation in a way that would make it easier to understand.

    26. Re:Number of legal positions by Khashishi · · Score: 2

      The reason is obvious. Scientific notation is mainly used for approximate results, and integers are exact.

    27. Re:Number of legal positions by dj245 · · Score: 1

      -1, idiotic

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    28. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Says the guy who has trouble with shrubberies.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    29. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For all intensive purposes, the phrases mean the same thing.

    30. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For all intensive purposes, the phrases mean the same thing.

      Sure, just as "intensive" and "intents and" mean the same thing. Coulda and "could of" are both misspellings of could've. Just because a mistake is common doesn't automatically make it correct.

    31. Re:Number of legal positions by Kaenneth · · Score: 2

      Binary?

    32. Re:Number of legal positions by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      google being stupid again, you are wrong: ...

      I'm confused. Are you saying: (punctuation added)
      (a) Google, being stupid again, ...
      (b) Google "being stupid" again, ...

      Because those two interpretations seem very different.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    33. Re:Number of legal positions by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Damn! They guessed my pin number. I hate it when that happens.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    34. Re:Number of legal positions by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      Pffft, Cobolers

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    35. Re:Number of legal positions by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      If, you, understand, b, you, should, do, what, b, sais.

    36. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why they chose to present it like that, instead of scientific notation, I'll never know but there it is.

      Because it is an integer.

    37. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If, you, understand, b, you, should, do, what, b, sais.

      Ah, hello Captain Kirk. I didn't know you had an account on Slashdot.

    38. Re:Number of legal positions by ChoGGi · · Score: 1

      6.69723114288829212893e+152

    39. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of the same, yes. But not precisely the same. There is a distinction and, if you want, you can learn more about it, with one possible starting point being http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

    40. Re:Number of legal positions by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      No, that answer has thrown away more than 10 ^ 142 combinations.
      If you would gift me a billionth of a penny for each combination you threw away, I likely would still be the richest man of the world.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    41. Re:Number of legal positions by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Because now I know it's 151 digits. Had no idea before.

      ... but it's 153 digits, not 151. Or at least that's what grep -P -o '\d' | wc says when I paste the number into it...

    42. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While theoretically true, that goes against the convention of significant digits. To express the true precision of this number you'd have to end the mantissa with infinite number of zeros, which makes getting to the exponent part fairly difficult. You could achieve with exponentially diminishing font size, though. Should we go with that?

    43. Re:Number of legal positions by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      pedant: anything raised to the zeroth power is equal to one.

      So, 2x10^0=2x1=1.

      So you're saying that 2 feet is equal to 1 foot.

      OK.

      (ergo, 2 feet != 2.00000000 x 10^0) :)

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    44. Re:Number of legal positions by vux984 · · Score: 1

      So, 2x10^0=2x1=1.

      You might want to check your math.

      I predict a face palm in your near future. :)

    45. Re:Number of legal positions by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      oh snap.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    46. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phantomfive, first may I say that your "code review" was a disappointment. I was hoping for a pretense to objectivity.

      However, the gnome/systemd thing has been fought out on the gnome developers mailing list, on LWN, and on various developer's blogs. The short form is they need various (generally session-related) features that are not provided by anything else. All of these decisions have been fought over heavily.

      https://blogs.gnome.org/ovitte...
      https://blogs.gnome.org/ovitte...
      http://lwn.net/Articles/520892...

      Frankly, I don't think you have any qualifications to be second-guessing anyone else's coding decisions, and certainly not if your "code review" is any evidence. However, all of the decisions and justifications have been public, so the information is out there if you want to look.

    47. Re:Number of legal positions by Threni · · Score: 1

      So write the answer to this problem using that notation.

    48. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Too lazy. It would require me to count the number of digits.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    49. Re:Number of legal positions by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Better than the post I was replying to, that was off by a factor of 10.

    50. Re:Number of legal positions by Threni · · Score: 1

      Are you sure the correct answer is "it's generally not possible to represent numbers accurately using that format"? Where "accurately" means "the correct answer". If you counted the number of digits it would so you could say "oh, and this many digits i'm going to set to zero". Sometimes you want a jpeg, and sometimes you want a RAW file.

    51. Re:Number of legal positions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Are you sure the correct answer is "it's generally not possible to represent numbers accurately using that format"? Where "accurately" means "the correct answer".

      Yes.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    52. Re:Number of legal positions by hawkfish · · Score: 1

      Because now I know it's 151 digits. Had no idea before.

      How can you know I didn't just guess?

      Maybe you did - my text editor says 152!

      --
      You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
    53. Re:Number of legal positions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They want an exact number. There is only one way to write it down. They already have an approximation they stated was ~ a x 10^170.

    54. Re:Number of legal positions by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      The answer has been known to be about 3^361 for ... probably longer than the notation for expressing 3^361 has been known. That is approximately 10^172.24, but you need to correct for the number of board positions which are not legal. That's not going to be a simple function of board size, I suspect.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  9. I disagree with that number... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Run it again 10 times just to make sure.

  10. In case anyone was wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go is a game, a bit like Othello or Reversi, that involves colored stones on a grid-like board.

    I had to look it up too. Figured I'd save you some typing.

    1. Re:In case anyone was wondering... by ledow · · Score: 4, Informative

      Although a lot of knowledge is assumed on here, Go is one of the most well-known and popular board games worldwide. Probably more popular than chess, even.

      Othello/Reversi, however is, not only a poor comparison but relatively unheard of. (I'm a massive fan of Othello, it has to be said).

      Go is NOT like Othello at all. You have to put coloured stones on a grid-like board, 19x19 for standard Go, in such a way to "enclose" a block of your opponent's pieces. The complexity of Go is RIDICULOUSLY high, so much so that just to hold work out how many board positions there are takes months of computing time. Imagine how good the AI players are in such a circumstance!

      When I was at university, 15 years ago, one of my professors (Professor Wilfred Hodges) was working on Go. It was his introductory lecture to describe the complexity of the game. It's astounding. At the time, the most powerful computer player in the world couldn't come close to beating even a seasoned amateur. They're a little closer now but nowhere near the way that Chess can be dominated by a single machine.

      Go is one demonstration of how a human's pattern-matching and simultaneous processing can far outweigh anything that a computer can do at the moment. No doubt, with breakthroughs of thought and ever-increasing speed of computers, we'll eventually get there, but a human brain has been able to be there for, well, probably thousands of years already. And on a "puzzle" that's entirely logic-based and effectively ternary (white, black or no stone at all on each space).

    2. Re:In case anyone was wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What I enjoy the most is when the game is over and you spend a few hours discussing who won.

  11. Good job. by AndyKron · · Score: 0

    Just think of all the people this work will save!

    1. Re:Good job. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I like to imagine you alt-tabbed from World of Warcraft sipping on a latte while typing that.

  12. And in a few years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will be able to do the exact same thing, in a few minutes, on a cellphone.

    Why are they wasting useful computing power of this useless junk...

  13. Yeah terrible name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It also takes a lot more than 5 of anything! (except maybe months)

    (go is 5 in Japanese)

  14. A Game Worth Playing by Anna+Merikin · · Score: 1

    A game for adults http://www.sharedwisdom.com/ar...
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Mast...

    1. Re:A Game Worth Playing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What?

  15. O(c) by vasilevich · · Score: 0

    Now, it is just a matter of O(c) time.

  16. Ask for Amazon to Donate the Compute Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That is about $75k of computing resources from Amazon Web Services.

    1. Re:Ask for Amazon to Donate the Compute Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask Amazon to gimme $50k and I save you the burden to worry about that for several months.

  17. Isn't that the point?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody cares about this number, and the proof of this is that the number isn't news worthy compared to how many servers and time it would take to computer the 19x19 solution.

    What they've done there is busy work, showing they could do it. But its more about showing computing power than Go moves.

    So even if GGP said its about 1e151, thats about as worthwhile as that number gets.

    1. Re:Isn't that the point?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess the topics of numerical computation, algorithm design and others are not worthwhile in your world. Here in the real world, they are, and the road towards this result (and hopefully the subsequent one) contributes to several of them.

  18. What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a waste of time and energy; what's the point of all this seriously. Next what, you're going to compute the Trillionth digit of Pi?

  19. Big calculations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a big calculation, like the recent calculation of Pi to a few trillion decimal places, on super x86 hardware, calculating for a few months.

    At these scales, you need ecc memory, some checking for errors and storage of intermediate results to allow for hardware failures. See:
    http://www.numberworld.org/misc_runs/pi-12t/#hardware

  20. Spoiler by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

    Spoiler Alert: It's 669,723,114,288,829,212,892,740,188,841,706,543,509,937,780,640,178,732,810,318,337,696,945,624,428,547,218,105,214,326,012,774,371,397,184,848,890,970,111,836,283,470,468,812,827,907,149,926,502,347,633

  21. Last digit always odd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else notice this pattern?

    1. Re:Last digit always odd? by johntromp · · Score: 1

      The only position not having a color-swapped sibling is the empty position...

  22. Just found that out today by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Funny

    My Computer:
    "For no reason at all, would you like to play a game of Go today?" *casual indifference*

    Me:
    "Sure, 20x20 board?" *smiles*

    Computer:
    "Never mind" *sulks*

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Just found that out today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have to be odd sizes. No one plays on even x even boards. 5x5, 13x13, and 19x19 are the sizes

    2. Re:Just found that out today by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Computer: Would you like to play "Total Thermo Nuclear War"?

      Meh: sure

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    3. Re:Just found that out today by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Damn, totally blew the joke. Should have gone with 19x19...

      Thanks for the info.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  23. Pfft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The answer will be between

    24779755228686 68087703138698 71431421098676 97883686613113 98177849478698 81038562470698 92930062472651 74169583940896 58941379424884 07346074632564 547280586862421

    and

    30156553976745 68446309138474 26878159377789 74486089240655 22534681739646 00418871679365 526560831706944 8638489689943 3526718133628 59275928807723 25049731783477 21398241931229 1779

    (split up to avoid slashdot's moronic filtering)

  24. Internet GO by a_claudiu · · Score: 2

    Now let's give each position an IPv6 address. Ooops!

  25. Not much to transfer the other way by Laxator2 · · Score: 1

    I can tell from my experience, having played Go decently, but being a calamity at Chess.

    To give an example, I wrote a chess-playing program (a simple alpha-beta minimax with a value function pilfered from SunFish
    https://github.com/thomasahle/...
    No iterative deepening, no transposition table, no null-move search, no ...). When I set it to just 4 plies (that is two moves ahead) it absolutely destroys me. Basically, to be a decent chess player, you must have the ability to picture the board in your head and be able to do so for a few moves ahead. It is absolutely necessary when calculating exchanges and piece sacrifices. So a bit of ability to play blindfold chess is needed. Not a whole game, but to follow a line in your head.

    Contrast this with Go, where blindfold play is almost unheard of. One of the well-known difficulties is to "play under the stones"
    http://senseis.xmp.net/?IshiNo...
    where part of a group is captured and you have to play new stones on the vacated intersections. This is a place where blindfold-chess type of skill is required, and most Go players avoid that. Here is a great article on that:

    http://senseis.xmp.net/?Herman...

    Also, the opening in chess follows very precise sequences, while in Go, the two players can almost ignore each other for the first few moves.
    In the opening you have to think of the large-scale pattern of the territory you want to grab, not of the exact position of one piece/stone.

    1. Re:Not much to transfer the other way by nojayuk · · Score: 1

      There's a version of blindfold Go where both players use the same colour of stones. They can see all the stones placed on the board so it's theoretically still a full-information game. They remember who played which stone or they can work it out from the pattern.

    2. Re:Not much to transfer the other way by Laxator2 · · Score: 2

      Agreed, there is "one color go" as you describe it.
      The point I was trying to make is that while this version of go is not very popular, any chess player starting at about National Master level (and certainly for those at IM level) is capable of playing blindfolded.
      This ability is simply a by-product of their training, not something they specifically aim for.
      For Go players, the ability to play with the same color stones is not something that follows naturally from their training.

      Go and Chess expand different abilities of the human brain.

  26. And the point is ....? by fygment · · Score: 1

    Besides curiousity, why was computing power (read: energy) spent on this?

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  27. TIL; There are illegal Go positions. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did not have a clue! I never heard anyone say; "I'm sorry its illegal for you to place your stone there." It might be meaningless, but illegal?

  28. next milestone by ihtoit · · Score: 1

    compute the number of nodes and CPU-hours required, hence the system cost, of a 20x20 system.

    That's before you even start calculating the actual positions.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  29. 576 bits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This post no verb

  30. They should give both by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 1

    It's interesting to see the exact number, but we obviously can't grok it. We want to know how many digits that number has.

    --
    Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free