Comments on: Machine defeats man at go http://www.numenware.com/article/538 Religion. Brain. Dogen. Language. Japan. Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:38:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Marc http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-830 Marc Sat, 28 Oct 2006 22:54:49 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-830 Part of the playing strength of Crazy Stone on 7x7 comes from an opening book that is based on an analysis done by humans. The 9x9 version does not have such an opening book and is much weaker than the 7x7 version. Part of the playing strength of Crazy Stone on 7×7 comes from an opening book that is based on an analysis done by humans. The 9×9 version does not have such an opening book and is much weaker than the 7×7 version.

]]> By: peko http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-759 peko Fri, 22 Sep 2006 16:44:30 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-759 please from where you have “a machine has consistently defeated a top professional at at the game of “go�.� ? thanks please from where you have “a machine has consistently defeated a top professional at at the game of “go�.� ?

thanks

]]> By: Stephan http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-783 Stephan Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:29:33 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-783 I could beat this program giving it 4 stones handicap on a 9x9 board. I cannot believe the story about the top go pro is true. The game follows. (;FF[4]CA[Cp1252]AP[GoGui:0.9.1]SZ[9]KM[6.5]DT[2006-09-22]RE[W+Resign] ;B[ee];W[];B[ff];W[];B[dd];W[];B[cc];W[dg];B[fg];W[gd] ;B[eh];W[ce];B[ec];W[hf];B[ge];W[he];B[hd];W[gc];B[bd];W[dh] ;B[di];W[ci];B[hg];W[be];B[bi];W[ei];B[df];W[cf];B[gg];W[fb] ;B[bh];W[bg];B[id];W[hc];B[if];W[ic];B[ae];W[af];B[ig];W[ie] ;B[ch];W[eg];B[fh];W[di];B[fa];W[eb];B[gb];W[db];B[bb];W[fd] ;B[dc];W[ad];B[hb];W[fe];B[fc];W[ib];B[ef];W[cg];B[ac];W[cb] ;B[fi];W[ca];B[cd];W[ba];B[de];W[gf];B[ga];W[ea];B[aa];W[ha] ;B[ah];W[ag];B[gb];W[ai];B[bi];W[ab];B[bc];W[ae];B[bh];W[ah]) I could beat this program giving it 4 stones handicap on a 9×9 board. I cannot believe the story about the top go pro is true. The game follows.

(;FF[4]CA[Cp1252]AP[GoGui:0.9.1]SZ[9]KM[6.5]DT[2006-09-22]RE[W+Resign]
;B[ee];W[];B[ff];W[];B[dd];W[];B[cc];W[dg];B[fg];W[gd]
;B[eh];W[ce];B[ec];W[hf];B[ge];W[he];B[hd];W[gc];B[bd];W[dh]
;B[di];W[ci];B[hg];W[be];B[bi];W[ei];B[df];W[cf];B[gg];W[fb]
;B[bh];W[bg];B[id];W[hc];B[if];W[ic];B[ae];W[af];B[ig];W[ie]
;B[ch];W[eg];B[fh];W[di];B[fa];W[eb];B[gb];W[db];B[bb];W[fd]
;B[dc];W[ad];B[hb];W[fe];B[fc];W[ib];B[ef];W[cg];B[ac];W[cb]
;B[fi];W[ca];B[cd];W[ba];B[de];W[gf];B[ga];W[ea];B[aa];W[ha]
;B[ah];W[ag];B[gb];W[ai];B[bi];W[ab];B[bc];W[ae];B[bh];W[ah])

]]> By: Ettsem http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-782 Ettsem Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:29:56 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-782 How much more difficult is 19 x 19 than 9 x 9? Even if the difficulty increases exponentially after the trival 3 x 3, it seems to me that the programmers and hardware designers are closing in on humans in this particular realm, and will soon surpass us. Processors are becoming smaller and cheaper. Picture a parallel computer containing trillions of simple processors—a teraprocessor, you might call it. Now program in “imagination” and foresight in the form of internal simulations. Would a human mind, with it trillions of biological processors, be able to compete with that in any realm of the intellect? So what is it that humans can do that cannot also be done by algorithms running in parallel? Can anybody here answer that without invoking something ineffable like a soul? If your answer is something like “Love”, try actually defining what it is you are describing. You may find that you aren’t as sure as you originally were. If and when computers learn to learn, we may find ourselves obsolete. We may also find ourselves wondering if we’ve been replaced by something alive or dead (if that actually means anything). How much more difficult is 19 x 19 than 9 x 9? Even if the difficulty increases exponentially after the trival 3 x 3, it seems to me that the programmers and hardware designers are closing in on humans in this particular realm, and will soon surpass us.

Processors are becoming smaller and cheaper. Picture a parallel computer containing trillions of simple processors—a teraprocessor, you might call it. Now program in “imagination” and foresight in the form of internal simulations. Would a human mind, with it trillions of biological processors, be able to compete with that in any realm of the intellect?

So what is it that humans can do that cannot also be done by algorithms running in parallel? Can anybody here answer that without invoking something ineffable like a soul?

If your answer is something like “Love”, try actually defining what it is you are describing. You may find that you aren’t as sure as you originally were.

If and when computers learn to learn, we may find ourselves obsolete. We may also find ourselves wondering if we’ve been replaced by something alive or dead (if that actually means anything).

]]> By: Ettsem http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-587 Ettsem Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:29:34 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-587 By the way, if anybody wants to ponder what it means for us to be made obsolete by artificial intelligence, I recommend the book “Imaginary Magnitude” (“Wielkość urojona” in the original Polish) by Stanislaw Lem. Although the book was written back in 1973, and is presented as science fiction, it really made the subject come alive for me. It’s a tough read until you see what the author is leading towards. Then it becomes unsettling. Stanislaw Lem is usually remembered for “Solaris” and “The Futorological Congress”, but I think he will ultimately be best remembered for “Imaginary Magnitude”. Just don’t ask me who is going to be doing the remembering. By the way, if anybody wants to ponder what it means for us to be made obsolete by artificial intelligence, I recommend the book “Imaginary Magnitude” (“Wielkość urojona” in the original Polish) by Stanislaw Lem. Although the book was written back in 1973, and is presented as science fiction, it really made the subject come alive for me.

It’s a tough read until you see what the author is leading towards. Then it becomes unsettling.

Stanislaw Lem is usually remembered for “Solaris” and “The Futorological Congress”, but I think he will ultimately be best remembered for “Imaginary Magnitude”. Just don’t ask me who is going to be doing the remembering.

]]> By: Kate http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-743 Kate Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:05:49 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-743 Give it time, folks. To assume that a computer, or network of computers, can never defeat a human on a 19x19 go board is not the endorsement of human ingenuity you think it is. Give it time, folks. To assume that a computer, or network of computers, can never defeat a human on a 19×19 go board is not the endorsement of human ingenuity you think it is.

]]> By: senpai http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-742 senpai Fri, 22 Sep 2006 03:40:12 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-742 <i>The real question is whether this is a one-trick pony useful only for 9×9, or whether it can be usefully extended to 19×19. </i> Yeah, that’s the real question, and the real answer is no, and has been for years. Nothing to see here, folks. The real question is whether this is a one-trick pony useful only for 9×9, or whether it can be usefully extended to 19×19.

Yeah, that’s the real question, and the real answer is no, and has been for years. Nothing to see here, folks.

]]> By: Dave http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-739 Dave Thu, 21 Sep 2006 23:20:26 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-739 Daniel, perhaps your lecturer was hoping that one of you was a genius. No such luck I assume. <a href="http://www.snopes.com/college/homework/unsolvable.asp"> http://www.snopes.com/college/homework/unsolvable.asp</a> Daniel, perhaps your lecturer was hoping that one of you was a genius. No such luck I assume.

http://www.snopes.com/college/homework/unsolvable.asp

]]> By: Daniel http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-779 Daniel Thu, 21 Sep 2006 23:00:59 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-779 Our AI lecturer once set us this problem as an assignment. He was so incompetent. Our AI lecturer once set us this problem as an assignment. He was so incompetent.

]]> By: tasty http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-778 tasty Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:27:11 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-778 The headline is a bit misleading—9x9 is not a standard go board size. I don’t think this method will scale well to 19x19. The headline is a bit misleading—9×9 is not a standard go board size. I don’t think this method will scale well to 19×19.

]]> By: peko http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-650 peko Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:54:24 +0000 http://www.numenware.com/article/538#comment-650 please from where you have “a machine has consistently defeated a top professional at at the game of “goâ€?.” thanks please from where you have “a machine has consistently defeated a top professional at at the game of “goâ€?.”

thanks

]]>