I really haven't learned what I was hoping to, but my current theory (slightly modified by this discussion) is that Oracle basically murdered browser-based Java.
Browser based Java died for the same reason as Browser based Flash: it didn't work well in mobile.
not many new projects are being started in Python today......Golang, otoh, is alive and doing very well. Docker, Kubernetes, Terraform, Etcd, and Prometheus are a few of the high profile FOSS projects written in Go.
Oh, you are looking at devops use cases. For things like AI research, Python is still popular.
I had the impression there was some sort of feedback mechanism in how much bitcoin you get for mining a block.
It becomes easier when fewer people are in the mining pool. But a lot of people already bought their equipment, so there is no reason to drop out of the mining pool. Better to partially get back your investment than to lose it all.
I can talk about this a lot and I am happy to do so. We know that the system can only play on this map. We know that it can create a well optimized, though undirected, build order. It also started by following human replays. Also, it has very very precise micro (basically, all the units target the correct opponent unit, and move back at the correct time). My hypothesis of how it plays is: it has an OK build, then sends units to certain places on the map at certain times, because that worked before. It is not reacting to what it sees, other than to decide to engage or retreat. Because it doesn't have particular understanding of things, it can't transfer the knowledge it got here to anywhere else. So actually the strategy part is far weaker than the results would indicate. The mechanics are very good, though.
OK. But by that argument the FCC shouldn't have the right to regulate use of frequencies that are not powerful enough to be detected in another state.
I think I like that.
I've never heard of that opinion, but now I'm starting to like that, too.
Incidentally, when I recently had a chance to ask the head of the Watson team Europe in private about AGI, he immediately said "not in the next 50 years".
Normally I would post a comment here affirming your intelligence (and I do, I affirm your intelligence) and agreeing with you.
I still mostly agree with you, but it should be pointed out that the Google team seems to have started coming up with slightly new algorithms, so if they keep going, they may find some insight that leads to a more complete AGI solution. Low probability but it seems there is real progress finally.
Where exactly does one draw the line about what constitutes "cheating", versus exploiting a natural advantage?
I suggest that by looking a the goal, you can determine the line. Google here wants to create intelligence, but they won with a pure mechanical advantage.
So we can congratulate them for......making a computer that clicks with precision. Good job Google. But from watching the games, it's clear they failed on intelligence.
Yeah, that is something that should be emphasized more. Having a knowledge of a player's strats can be a huge advantage. We see it fairly often in Starcraft: some player will come up with a new strategy, win everything, and it will take a few months for other players to come up with a good counter-strategy. But soon everyone knows how to counter it, and the player falls from the heights.
Note that humans regularly beat the best AI scripted bots in SC2, that too when the bot is allowed to cheat somewhat.
I think humans would regularly beat AlphaStar too if they played regularly. The strats chosen weren't that good, and it didn't take long for a human to poke holes in them.
Ergo, my "analytics" consists of a few lines of C# code which runs against a folder of daily nginx logs, filters out bots/referrer spam and produces a simple table of what's been going on. It's not rocket science.
That's really good but it doesn't tell you things like age, gender, geo-location, and interests of your visitors. You might not care, of course.
One nagging question I've always wondered is whether or not google internally demotes websites containing no tracker scripts, on a presumption that "its owner is not working to track visitors/revenue, therefor it is not a serious candidate for these search terms."
Doesn't seem to. I only have one website to test this with, so the error bars are wide, but my answer is no.
One of the many reasons I was glad to leave OSX was to be done with the lousy package management solutions. I am grateful for them, they were better than nothing, but there are so many better options on Linux.
This isn't so bad for Android, because they just turn off the entire Java security model and rely on OS-level sandboxing
OK, just do that. Java was never meant as security against people who can execute code on your system (Applets containers were, but they also weren't standard Java).
And that itself is quite a feat because following a script cannot get you into that position consistently.
Give it a script with several basic build orders (because each game was against a different agent, with a different playing style), and that kind of micro, and it would be able to do that consistently.
You think that beating a pro in Starcraft is just a matter of clicking fast ?
Did you watch the games? In this case, it was more like precision than speed. All you need to do is program some basic strategies, then give the computer really good micro, and it will win.
Watch the pros play: how many of the 15 clicks per second are actually accurate.
Pros don't click 15 times per second, that's probably impossible physically. When they get an APM that high, it's by spamming on the keyboard in combination with clicks (something holding down a key to get the repeat, or spinning the mouse wheel).
Slashdot Mirror
I really haven't learned what I was hoping to, but my current theory (slightly modified by this discussion) is that Oracle basically murdered browser-based Java.
Browser based Java died for the same reason as Browser based Flash: it didn't work well in mobile.
I don't much like any of the languages that are in use today.
What language do you like?
not many new projects are being started in Python today......Golang, otoh, is alive and doing very well. Docker, Kubernetes, Terraform, Etcd, and Prometheus are a few of the high profile FOSS projects written in Go.
Oh, you are looking at devops use cases. For things like AI research, Python is still popular.
How can WebAssembly be less secure than the actual ARM assembly that is allowed already in any app?
No, and that is just your ignorance of Go. You can't formalize a player's strategy in Go
Hey, welcome to the conversation, that's nice but we're talking about Starcraft.
I had the impression there was some sort of feedback mechanism in how much bitcoin you get for mining a block.
It becomes easier when fewer people are in the mining pool. But a lot of people already bought their equipment, so there is no reason to drop out of the mining pool. Better to partially get back your investment than to lose it all.
How can you measure how close or far we are?
I can talk about this a lot and I am happy to do so. We know that the system can only play on this map. We know that it can create a well optimized, though undirected, build order. It also started by following human replays. Also, it has very very precise micro (basically, all the units target the correct opponent unit, and move back at the correct time). My hypothesis of how it plays is: it has an OK build, then sends units to certain places on the map at certain times, because that worked before. It is not reacting to what it sees, other than to decide to engage or retreat. Because it doesn't have particular understanding of things, it can't transfer the knowledge it got here to anywhere else. So actually the strategy part is far weaker than the results would indicate. The mechanics are very good, though.
OK. But by that argument the FCC shouldn't have the right to regulate use of frequencies that are not powerful enough to be detected in another state. I think I like that.
I've never heard of that opinion, but now I'm starting to like that, too.
High time for Trump's executive branch to apply Andrew Jackson's words: "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."
I......don't think that was a great example of what a president should do.
Incidentally, when I recently had a chance to ask the head of the Watson team Europe in private about AGI, he immediately said "not in the next 50 years".
Normally I would post a comment here affirming your intelligence (and I do, I affirm your intelligence) and agreeing with you.
I still mostly agree with you, but it should be pointed out that the Google team seems to have started coming up with slightly new algorithms, so if they keep going, they may find some insight that leads to a more complete AGI solution. Low probability but it seems there is real progress finally.
Where exactly does one draw the line about what constitutes "cheating", versus exploiting a natural advantage?
I suggest that by looking a the goal, you can determine the line. Google here wants to create intelligence, but they won with a pure mechanical advantage.
So we can congratulate them for......making a computer that clicks with precision. Good job Google. But from watching the games, it's clear they failed on intelligence.
Yeah, that is something that should be emphasized more. Having a knowledge of a player's strats can be a huge advantage. We see it fairly often in Starcraft: some player will come up with a new strategy, win everything, and it will take a few months for other players to come up with a good counter-strategy. But soon everyone knows how to counter it, and the player falls from the heights.
Note that humans regularly beat the best AI scripted bots in SC2, that too when the bot is allowed to cheat somewhat.
I think humans would regularly beat AlphaStar too if they played regularly. The strats chosen weren't that good, and it didn't take long for a human to poke holes in them.
Ergo, my "analytics" consists of a few lines of C# code which runs against a folder of daily nginx logs, filters out bots/referrer spam and produces a simple table of what's been going on. It's not rocket science.
That's really good but it doesn't tell you things like age, gender, geo-location, and interests of your visitors. You might not care, of course.
One nagging question I've always wondered is whether or not google internally demotes websites containing no tracker scripts, on a presumption that "its owner is not working to track visitors/revenue, therefor it is not a serious candidate for these search terms."
Doesn't seem to. I only have one website to test this with, so the error bars are wide, but my answer is no.
considering all the cookie filters and other filters from people that don't want to be tracked.
I think most people are just annoyed about having to click "confirm" on every single website.
One of the many reasons I was glad to leave OSX was to be done with the lousy package management solutions. I am grateful for them, they were better than nothing, but there are so many better options on Linux.
This isn't so bad for Android, because they just turn off the entire Java security model and rely on OS-level sandboxing
OK, just do that. Java was never meant as security against people who can execute code on your system (Applets containers were, but they also weren't standard Java).
I literally have no idea why you think that.
And that itself is quite a feat because following a script cannot get you into that position consistently.
Give it a script with several basic build orders (because each game was against a different agent, with a different playing style), and that kind of micro, and it would be able to do that consistently.
You think that beating a pro in Starcraft is just a matter of clicking fast ?
Did you watch the games? In this case, it was more like precision than speed. All you need to do is program some basic strategies, then give the computer really good micro, and it will win.
To see examples of what computers can do, check this out. Here is another one (the stalker micro at 0:11 is very similar to what Deep Mind was doing).
All you need to do is have the input be a mouse. Playing field levelled.
Computers can click mice faster than humans, too.
Watch the pros play: how many of the 15 clicks per second are actually accurate.
Pros don't click 15 times per second, that's probably impossible physically. When they get an APM that high, it's by spamming on the keyboard in combination with clicks (something holding down a key to get the repeat, or spinning the mouse wheel).
It should be clear to anyone that in the final game Mana won by the drop play.
He also built an army that was a direct counter to what the computer had.
So when an AI does it it is all of a sudden not fair?
It's not about fairness. We've known that computers can click faster than humans for a long time, just like forklifts can life more than humans.
It's just not very impressive. Woohoo Google, good job building a computer that can click fast? Should they be congratulated for that?