8 ms·

That makes for a good headline but it's not actually true. AI beat humans in two-player, unlimited stakes, no-limit hold-em.

lisper 9y ago
And how does that fact in any way refute my claim?
- bradleyjg 9y ago
  It's not the standard version of the game. If computers were consistently beating the best in the world in blitz chess but not standard tournament rules we wouldn't say that "chess is solved".
  - lisper 9y ago
    I didn't say poker was "solved", I said it had "fallen". It's true that poker is not completely solved, but neither is chess. It is still not known whether white has a forced win. It is possible that some day this will be known, and if the answer is yes, then a human playing white may be able to learn the strategy and hence beat any machine. But that will be only marginally more interesting than the fact that a human player can force a draw in tic-tac-toe. The difference between "fallen" and "solved" is just not that interesting. Checkers is solved, but no one cares. I see no reason to believe that the techniques used to beat the best human players in one variant of poker cannot be extended to beat the best human players in any variant of poker, or, for that matter, to any game with randomness and hidden state.
    - bluetwo 9y ago
      I would welcome the chance to play you in poker.
- AnimalMuppet 9y ago
  It limits your claim. Putting an AI in a poker tournament with 10 players at the table is not yet a solved problem.
  - lisper 9y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  "Poker" is a much broader category than "two-player, unlimited stakes, no-limit hold-em." Particularly, it's usually a multiplayer game at the outset, and has many varieties other than hold 'em (which just happens to be the currently—and this is a fairly recent development—popular form.)
  - lisper 9y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668
lern_too_spel 9y ago
Heads-up limit hold-em was solved years ago. No limit is a harder game.

lisper 9y ago

And how does that fact in any way refute my claim?

bradleyjg 9y ago
It's not the standard version of the game. If computers were consistently beating the best in the world in blitz chess but not standard tournament rules we wouldn't say that "chess is solved".
- lisper 9y ago
  I didn't say poker was "solved", I said it had "fallen". It's true that poker is not completely solved, but neither is chess. It is still not known whether white has a forced win. It is possible that some day this will be known, and if the answer is yes, then a human playing white may be able to learn the strategy and hence beat any machine. But that will be only marginally more interesting than the fact that a human player can force a draw in tic-tac-toe. The difference between "fallen" and "solved" is just not that interesting. Checkers is solved, but no one cares. I see no reason to believe that the techniques used to beat the best human players in one variant of poker cannot be extended to beat the best human players in any variant of poker, or, for that matter, to any game with randomness and hidden state.
  - bluetwo 9y ago
    I would welcome the chance to play you in poker.
AnimalMuppet 9y ago
It limits your claim. Putting an AI in a poker tournament with 10 players at the table is not yet a solved problem.
- lisper 9y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668
dragonwriter 9y ago
"Poker" is a much broader category than "two-player, unlimited stakes, no-limit hold-em." Particularly, it's usually a multiplayer game at the outset, and has many varieties other than hold 'em (which just happens to be the currently—and this is a fairly recent development—popular form.)
- lisper 9y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14419668

lern_too_spel 9y ago

Heads-up limit hold-em was solved years ago. No limit is a harder game.