Slashdot Mirror
Google AI AlphaGo Wins Again, Leaves Humans In the Dust (cnet.com)
Google's AlphaGo has defeated the world's best Go player in the second out of three games, scoring an overall win for the artificial intelligence algorithm in the fiendishly complex board game. CNET adds: The human gave it his all. "Incredible," wrote DeepMind founder and CEO Demis Hassabis on Twitter while the match was underway. "According to AlphaGo evaluations Ke Jie is playing perfectly at the moment." The match took place over a year after AlphaGo bested Lee Sedol, one of the world's top Go players, in four out of five matches in March 2016. It also beat European champion Fan Hui 5-0 in October 2015. The match was being played in China, the place where the abstract and intuitive board game was born. The government, however, isn't a big fan of letting its citizens know about the battle and has censored all the livestreams in the country.
Can someone explain what AlphaGo is accomplishing by beating people over and over? I thought it was ascertained a month ago that it could calculate Go deeper than a human. How are they demonstrating that there is any learning going on at all at this point?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I'm all for anything that hoists Peking Party HQ on their petard.
Something isn't right with this story.
If it was such a success, why hasn't it been covered in the news? I haven't heard a single thing about this in China.
Leaves Humans In the Dust
No. In fact:
AlphaGo beat Ke Jie with only half a point difference--the smallest possible--but that may be due to the AI’s “safer” winning strategy.
Yes, that article is about the first match. It doesn't matter.
Let's consider one thing as well... How much electricity is Alpha Go's hardware using vs that poor human brain? Efficiency wise we still have the computer beat, even if we don't win and just come close.
Wow. A computer (designed by humans) beats humans at a game (designed by humans). Should I be impressed? I'm really not. Computers have been beating humans at games for DECADES! It doesn't really say anything about humans being obsolete when an AI trounces a human at tic-tac-toe.
I think AlphaGo's time would be better spent trying to do something that could benefit mankind. Figure out a health-care bill that is equitable for all. Balance the US budget. Anything but moving little rocks around on a grid!
...don't interest me. I get my kicks BELOW the waist, sunshine.
Don't be fooled by humans ability to play Go.
Humans are capable of basic rudimentary communication.
Although humans aren't truly intelligent, their behavior can at times mislead you into believing they are. However humans simply don't have a complex enough brain to have real thoughts.
All leading experts agree that on the evolutionary scale, space flight is a pre-requisite to intelligence. Like many species, humans are incapable of flight. Humans can construct very rudimentary machines enabling them to achieve atmospheric or space flight. Having no natural ability to fly demonstrates a true lack of any real intelligence in humans.
Humans can be trained to do tricks in exchange for a reward. Almost all humans will do various tricks in exchange for money, travel or entertainment. Some humans can even be coaxed to perform scientific experiments, or even publish a new scientific theory in exchange for scientific knowledge or gadgets. Don't be fooled by this. Their inability to instantly master new languages is one of many obvious indicators that humans are not truly intelligent. Humans actually believe that they created the machines.
Give humans some raw materials of high quality, and they can construct things demonstrating a rudimentary ability to create order and structure. Their adaptability allows them to use a wide variety of building materials such as steel, wood, plastic and stone to make their own nests.
Well maintained humans are completely safe in society. They are commonly seen nowdays in public. They are generally not known to hurt or attack. Get them vaccinated. Keep your license up to date. It is good to have a tag on your human in case it gets lost.
Humans are content with very little. They are inexpensive to keep and maintain. Provide fresh food and water. Play with your human every day. A human will be perfectly happy with an old, nearly worn out, obsolete Intra Glactica Net connection. They aren't demanding. Bring your human a new high tech toy every day and they will always be very happy to see you and greet you with great affection.
Humans are great at watching over the living unit when you are gone. They are instantly house-trained, and can be left indoors. Treated well, a human can almost seem as if it could genuinely love you.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Oh boy, they built a machine that can beat humans at a board game! Look out humans, Skynet is just around the corner!</sarcasm>
Tell you all what, don't bother me with this fake AI bullshit until you can come back with REAL AI that is comparable in ALL WAYS to a human mind. That includes, but is not limited to: A sense of humor. A full set of human emotions, which INCLUDES the ability to empathize and understand the emotions of actual humans (no mechanical autists, please!). Fully self-aware. Three Laws of Robotics safe.
How much longer do we have to be subjected to this gee-whiz nonsense of programs doing calculations better than humans? What human can compute a square root better than a 1975 HP calculator? Yeah, yeah, this used deep learning. In an extremely totally ridiculously limited domain.
What computers can't do well is things like vision and language. That's where humans excel, and programs still suck.
Uh... duh? GP was being sarcastic and making a joke...
The real intelligence isn't in the people playing the game, but the people who made the game in the first place. This is why AI is a misnomer here.
What they SHOULD do, is limit the power the computer playing the human can use. Since the Brain uses around 20W, the computer should be limited to the same. It's not just to keep things kinda even, it's an additional constraint that could drive development of the system.
...mangled and used the wrong descriptor in the reference, in case you were wondering.
I for one welcome our.....screwit--the bots are coming, run!
Table-ized A.I.
...man going through airport turnstile sideways, is going to Bangkok...
The only thing this says is that AI is a threat.
How about showing cases where AI adds good (and instantly available) jobs for the displaced, especially the long-term jobless? Not service/staffing jobs, but actual lines of work with an actual future.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
So the next step is that it needs to play itself?
If it beat a human that it determined was playing "perfectly", that's the only next opponent.
Perhaps they will teach even go masters something?
-Styopa
Go more like a language by which you communicate abstract ideas
This idea of "points" and "winning" is really a tacked-on thing. You can increase your abstract literacy by increasing your 'strength' in Go and finding more experienced players to converse with.
But the point is not to win, it's to find more experienced people to talk with.
A machine has absolutely no use for this, and anyone controlling the machine has no use for this either. This whole show is simply about propaganda and the triumph of might over right by brainless brute-force data processing. It's purely about demoralizing people, not about showcasing meaningful technological advances.
Google is basically bringing a flamethrower to a carpentry contest and saying they won because they were 'done' with their wood first.
How Go is supposed to be played is this: people build their strength to gain literacy, then they play games to construct simulated situations that are abstractly parallel to their real-life problems and search for insights in the matter.
Tokugawa and Toyotomi for example used to play Go. Neither was a master of the game, yet both were masters of their domains in reality. Their strength in the game didn't matter, they were literate enough, and they were able to communicate through the game to their immense profit and the strength of Japan, and so took the time to play.
It's too bad most people really have no idea what the point of games in general is. Too much low self esteem, too much blind ambition.