>, raises a lot of questions about what it means to be human. The relationship between AI and humans is developing and a topic of intense interest, especially a

>, raises a lot of questions about what it means to be human. The relationship between AI and humans is developing and a topic of intense interest, especially among the HN crowd. We're talking about 2 different things: the importance of the topic vs the the method of exposition. You're emphasizing the topic's importance. I'm not disagreeing with that. Instead, I'm explaining that the documentary's style of exposition would be a turnoff to a subset of the HN demographic. As example showing differences in how Battle of Midway can be explained... Here's the "personality-driven" type of history documentary. Scrub the video and you'll see there's a lot of video showing the narrators walking around the beach and flying in helicopters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo9wrUcb8jI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo9wrUcb8jI To be fair, some viewers need attractive people talking to the camera to make history "interesting". What does an attractive man walking along the beach have to do with explaining strategy and tactics at Midway?!? Nothing. Maybe some viewers need "eye candy" to go along with their medicine of history. Basically, all of The History Channel is structured as personality-driven type of documentaries with a human-interest angle. Compare that to another style of delivery with no video of talking heads but has a voice-over with maps and higher information content: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd8_vO5zrjo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd8_vO5zrjo If HN viewers want the 2nd style of documentary for AlphaGo, this thread's url is not it. The importance of "what it means to be human" is orthogonal to the method of explanation.