4 ms·
This is the performance vs understanding dialectic. A bunch of humans built a machine that is superior at chess, but that machine can't teach humans what it kno
by sukilot 7y ago
This is the performance vs understanding dialectic. A bunch of humans built a machine that is superior at chess, but that machine can't teach humans what it knows.
- agumonkey 7y agoReminds me how sometimes geniuses cannot translate the way their mind works to non-geniuses. It's such an implicit talent that it's not even .. "reified" in their upper brain. It all happens in cache.
- brudgers 7y agoChess computers teach by sparring rather than lecture. Humans still learn.
- gpm 7y agoAlpha *, at least, also learns by sparring, so there is a nice symmetry there.
- falcrist 7y agoHumans can and are absorbing some of what the machine has demonstrated. I think Kasparov has it right when he says that the best player isn't a human or a machine, but a human using a machine as a tool. The machine can help the player optimize and reduce mistakes, but machines don't yet know how to ask questions and explore in the same way. Maybe they never will.
- Icathian 7y agoThere's a name for this approach, they call human-AI teams "centaurs". It's a fascinating concept. I am deeply curious if eventually that will be outstripped by pure AI too. I believe so.
- naniwaduni 7y agoOptimal strategy for human-AI teams has been really close "defer to the computer for every move" for a while now. They're only interesting because they're adversarial.