> But a game like Pac-Man is intuitively understood by the average human because it’s fundamentally a “human” game - designed by humans, gives humans dopamine a

> But a game like Pac-Man is intuitively understood by the average human because it’s fundamentally a “human” game - designed by humans, gives humans dopamine and other chemical hits in a way that we might even perceive as “fun”. Imagine a game that requires lots of computation and no human-friendly interface - a machine would obviously “learn” the rules a lot faster. But if we're talking about creating AGI and the concerns that go with that (full automation, self-directed goals in the real world, etc), then the question is whether DL is enough on it's own to get there. As such, comparing AlphaGo to humans on a variety of tasks like Atari Games or Go is kind of the point. And Google's goal is turn it into a product, which means doing tasks humans currently do.