They have plenty of opportunity to not get addicted to the prescription stuff in the first place. It is their own fault they lack self control, and also their own fault that they looked to fix their pain with pills rather than live with a little bit of pain.
mandarin oranges are a symbol of prosperity, IBM explained
That needs to be explained? By IBM?
Everything is a "symbol of prosperity" in Chinese culture. There isn't anything in Chinese culture that doesn't come down to being about wanting to have lots of money.
You were replying to a comment about Go. If you were talking about Starcraft, then why were you agreeing with him about Go? Why didn't you say "I think this is a different situation with Starcraft". Instead, you agreed with him, implying the same thing applies across both games.
No, and that is just your ignorance of Go. You can't formalize a player's strategy in Go. Otherwise previous AI attempts would have already beaten human professionals. Instead, they could barely keep up with human amateurs even with a 9 stone handicap.
That's a load of shit. There are not enough human games to train the neural nets. The millions of games it played were against itself. Lee Sedol won the fourth game, then lost the fifth in a similarly decisive manner. "Never were any additional games" my arse.
Then they let loose AlphaZero on the internet Go servers as an anonymouse person and professionals quickly picked up on the fact that the anonymous person was not playing like anyone else.
So, no your "never were any additional games" is full of shit.
What? This is just a natural cycle. As we learn more about the elements we have created, maybe it will produce new insights that will help with creating even heavier elements.
No, because you trained it to do two sums. You did not train it to do arithmetic.
Your original complaint was that it did not develop an understanding of Starcraft mechanics. If it can play better than humans, it has demonstrably developed an understanding of Starcraft mechanics. Because your criteria was "Starcraft mechanics", not "all games ever".
See? More implicit goalpost shifting when you don't even understand your own argument.
If I'm on a high horse, then people here must be pretty fucking low. So many self-proclaimed nerds on here seem to have great trouble with the idea of putting effort into something, even if it means having to put more effort than other people. Only do what you're naturally good at. Don't bother trying to improve in other areas you're not. Make excuses for not trying, because some little green alien puppet on a swampy looking film set said so.
Uh no. I've been taught to memorize since I was a Chinese kid. Do you think people like me just remember things? No, we practice it just like anyone else. Some people, like me, need more effort to memorize things than others. It takes effort, but also developing a self awareness as to what helps memory and what doesn't.
The "high fluid IQ" thing sounds like an excuse that YOU read out of a self-help book to justify not spending effort after failing a few attempts. Same as all those excuses I heard from kids my age justifying why they won't even try to get better.
As for books, I recently read Barbara Oakley's (a PhD engineer) book that talks about all the research that has been done - some of them regarding the value of memorization, and also the value of spending time and effort and self-awareness to become better at memorization. But I have personally been doing a lot of the things she researches in her book since I was a Chinese kid. Don't need a self help book when I helped myself by myself.
It just requires practice. Keep repeating something until you remember. Take breaks. Repeat. Spread it over the course of days, and periodically recall things. It helps if you associate memories with somethining and repeat those associations as well.
Did you seriously just claim we have "rising wages" and "better living standards"? They've been stagnant for a long time. As for strong economic growth, considering the widening gap between rich and poor, the growth is obviously one sided and averages mean nothing.
I use keyboard most of the time, but I refuse to use things like emacs when reaching for the mouse and clicking is faster than typing the name of that long command.
There's no viable route from this to general purpose AI
How do you know? Is there a roadmap that says all AI must progress in this way? If there were such a roadmap, why do we still need research then? Do you even understand why we research things we don't have adequate knowledge/experience?
It did not acquire any actual understanding of Starcraft mechanics
If it beat professional human players, then yes it did acquire an actual understanding of Starcraft mechanics. In fact, a better understanding than humans.
If you give it Warcraft instead, it'll take another several months of work from a team of very intelligent humans to make it good at it. In fact, I'll bet a big enough balance patch will cause it to have to throw out everything it's learned.
So what? The fact it wasn't even able to do something like Starcraft before. Do you not understand that technological progress isn't linear? How long ago were people saying AI can't play Go. And how long after beating humans at Go that people like you were saying AI can't beat humans at things that require imperfect knowledge? Do you really think DeepMind started from scratch after conquering Go, or maybe they used their experience
The goal post has always been to replace human intelligence. I don't see any AI building Starcraft-playing AI's, or discussing how long it will be before they are replaced by even better AIs.
Uh no. Nice attempt at rewriting history, but there have been clear intermediate goalposts that people like you keep walking back on. Chess. Go. Poker. Starcraft. The list keeps building.
So what if you don't see AI building Starcraft-playing AIs? Your argument becomes more and more ridiculous. You claim there was absolutely no progress being made. And here, you reveal that your criteria of "progress" is replacing human intelligence. You realize you actually just shifted goalposts mid discussion, right? Now you're claiming any progress is no progress unless it replaces humans in one go.
Because humans have muscles that take time to move?
How can it not get closer? AI didn't used to be able to beat professional StarCraft players. Now they can. That is, by definition, moving closer, because it's not moving backwards, and clearly an improvement from not moving at all.
This is just more goalpost shifting, finding nonsense reasons to argue why it "doesn't count". Consider the alternative that maybe the things humans do aren't as as clever as we tell ourselves. If it's just "good micro", why can't humans use "good micro" to beat the AI, if we're so great?
Then tell that to the bunch of other arseholes with equally strong opinions that if you have a Y chromosome, you are male, regardless of any other biological factor.
The sooner people grow up and stop being scared of things being different from when they were children, we'll all be better off.
So the Bureau of Labor statistics is unquestionable when your favourite President is in office, but not valid when Obama was in office? Because when unemployment figures were looking good, cunts like you were saying the the Bureau of Labor were fudging the numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
They have plenty of opportunity to not get addicted to the prescription stuff in the first place. It is their own fault they lack self control, and also their own fault that they looked to fix their pain with pills rather than live with a little bit of pain.
mandarin oranges are a symbol of prosperity, IBM explained
That needs to be explained? By IBM?
Everything is a "symbol of prosperity" in Chinese culture. There isn't anything in Chinese culture that doesn't come down to being about wanting to have lots of money.
You were replying to a comment about Go. If you were talking about Starcraft, then why were you agreeing with him about Go? Why didn't you say "I think this is a different situation with Starcraft". Instead, you agreed with him, implying the same thing applies across both games.
No, and that is just your ignorance of Go. You can't formalize a player's strategy in Go. Otherwise previous AI attempts would have already beaten human professionals. Instead, they could barely keep up with human amateurs even with a 9 stone handicap.
That's a load of shit. There are not enough human games to train the neural nets. The millions of games it played were against itself. Lee Sedol won the fourth game, then lost the fifth in a similarly decisive manner. "Never were any additional games" my arse.
Then they let loose AlphaZero on the internet Go servers as an anonymouse person and professionals quickly picked up on the fact that the anonymous person was not playing like anyone else.
So, no your "never were any additional games" is full of shit.
Do you know what the meaning of anonymous means, you anonymous retard?
What? This is just a natural cycle. As we learn more about the elements we have created, maybe it will produce new insights that will help with creating even heavier elements.
Well, we've hit SJW-peak. Cunts like you calling anti-surveillance state "SJW". I guess you MRA/anti-SJW types are pro big government snooping.
Macros are terrible.
Seems you have trouble reading.
I explicitly talked about the effort required. I never claimed to be smart. I claimed to have spent time and effort. Learn to read.
Yes, it does. What else would an understanding of Starcraft entail, but to beat other people at Starcraft?
No, because you trained it to do two sums. You did not train it to do arithmetic.
Your original complaint was that it did not develop an understanding of Starcraft mechanics. If it can play better than humans, it has demonstrably developed an understanding of Starcraft mechanics. Because your criteria was "Starcraft mechanics", not "all games ever".
See? More implicit goalpost shifting when you don't even understand your own argument.
If I'm on a high horse, then people here must be pretty fucking low. So many self-proclaimed nerds on here seem to have great trouble with the idea of putting effort into something, even if it means having to put more effort than other people. Only do what you're naturally good at. Don't bother trying to improve in other areas you're not. Make excuses for not trying, because some little green alien puppet on a swampy looking film set said so.
And if anyone here bothered reading the article, you'd know this is not simply just dropping a bunch of enemies into your territory.
Uh no. I've been taught to memorize since I was a Chinese kid. Do you think people like me just remember things? No, we practice it just like anyone else. Some people, like me, need more effort to memorize things than others. It takes effort, but also developing a self awareness as to what helps memory and what doesn't.
The "high fluid IQ" thing sounds like an excuse that YOU read out of a self-help book to justify not spending effort after failing a few attempts. Same as all those excuses I heard from kids my age justifying why they won't even try to get better.
As for books, I recently read Barbara Oakley's (a PhD engineer) book that talks about all the research that has been done - some of them regarding the value of memorization, and also the value of spending time and effort and self-awareness to become better at memorization. But I have personally been doing a lot of the things she researches in her book since I was a Chinese kid. Don't need a self help book when I helped myself by myself.
Memorizing things is my kryptonite.
It just requires practice. Keep repeating something until you remember. Take breaks. Repeat. Spread it over the course of days, and periodically recall things. It helps if you associate memories with somethining and repeat those associations as well.
Did you seriously just claim we have "rising wages" and "better living standards"? They've been stagnant for a long time. As for strong economic growth, considering the widening gap between rich and poor, the growth is obviously one sided and averages mean nothing.
That's not an argument against immigrants. That's just arguments against people in general.
I use keyboard most of the time, but I refuse to use things like emacs when reaching for the mouse and clicking is faster than typing the name of that long command.
Are you saying Starcraft has a strict ruleset?
There's no viable route from this to general purpose AI
How do you know? Is there a roadmap that says all AI must progress in this way? If there were such a roadmap, why do we still need research then? Do you even understand why we research things we don't have adequate knowledge/experience?
It did not acquire any actual understanding of Starcraft mechanics
If it beat professional human players, then yes it did acquire an actual understanding of Starcraft mechanics. In fact, a better understanding than humans.
If you give it Warcraft instead, it'll take another several months of work from a team of very intelligent humans to make it good at it. In fact, I'll bet a big enough balance patch will cause it to have to throw out everything it's learned.
So what? The fact it wasn't even able to do something like Starcraft before. Do you not understand that technological progress isn't linear? How long ago were people saying AI can't play Go. And how long after beating humans at Go that people like you were saying AI can't beat humans at things that require imperfect knowledge? Do you really think DeepMind started from scratch after conquering Go, or maybe they used their experience
The goal post has always been to replace human intelligence. I don't see any AI building Starcraft-playing AI's, or discussing how long it will be before they are replaced by even better AIs.
Uh no. Nice attempt at rewriting history, but there have been clear intermediate goalposts that people like you keep walking back on. Chess. Go. Poker. Starcraft. The list keeps building.
So what if you don't see AI building Starcraft-playing AIs? Your argument becomes more and more ridiculous. You claim there was absolutely no progress being made. And here, you reveal that your criteria of "progress" is replacing human intelligence. You realize you actually just shifted goalposts mid discussion, right? Now you're claiming any progress is no progress unless it replaces humans in one go.
Because humans have muscles that take time to move?
So? AlphaStar has its own limitations too.
My question is how do people avoid picking up keyboard shortcuts and using keyboard navigation in the first place?
How can it not get closer? AI didn't used to be able to beat professional StarCraft players. Now they can. That is, by definition, moving closer, because it's not moving backwards, and clearly an improvement from not moving at all.
This is just more goalpost shifting, finding nonsense reasons to argue why it "doesn't count". Consider the alternative that maybe the things humans do aren't as as clever as we tell ourselves. If it's just "good micro", why can't humans use "good micro" to beat the AI, if we're so great?
Then tell that to the bunch of other arseholes with equally strong opinions that if you have a Y chromosome, you are male, regardless of any other biological factor.
The sooner people grow up and stop being scared of things being different from when they were children, we'll all be better off.
So the Bureau of Labor statistics is unquestionable when your favourite President is in office, but not valid when Obama was in office? Because when unemployment figures were looking good, cunts like you were saying the the Bureau of Labor were fudging the numbers.