hm, used to be said for chess too; a uniquely human creative skill.. I love the Go algorithm (there's 3 basic ones in there really), but no aspect of it seems c

hm, used to be said for chess too; a uniquely human creative skill.. I love the Go algorithm (there's 3 basic ones in there really), but no aspect of it seems creative. To try to see it in a grossly simplified step by step fashion: in the abstract, does seem similar to how a human would think of the game though; consider promising moves, where promising is some fuzzy intuition based on the pattern of the board -> for each of those, read how the responses might look like (which the computer does way way more than the human), and what you discover using this suggests other promising moves -> and at some depth of each such read, evaluate the board position; who looks ahead, which too is some fuzzy-ish intuition based on the board patern (though there are various heuristics humans would use when learning this). Computer also evaluates further, a number of fast playouts to the end and mixes this with that pattern-based evaluation. Is this the kind of thought process you'd associate with creativity? Seems search-based, analytic and strategic; only funny thing is how evaluations are pattern-based nebulous things, but that seems an implementation detail. In some situations, you may come up with evaluation procedures like say material advantage in chess and code the relevant decision procedure, in others, you'd "code" the decision procedure implicitly, by specifying a dataset that exemplifies the desired function, and use statistics to come up with that function. Increases the kinds of decisions you can implement tremendously as you can leverage implicit rather than just explicit knowledge, yes -- but conceptually kinda the same.