2 ms·
Yes, but it isn't useful. A conversation also has three outcomes (neutral, you like the person more, or less) and yet it doesn't make conversations similar to c
by gjulianm 6y ago
Yes, but it isn't useful. A conversation also has three outcomes (neutral, you like the person more, or less) and yet it doesn't make conversations similar to chess.
- whatshisface 6y agoChess and math are both searches over countably infinite trees.
- gjulianm 6y agoAnd a conversation is a search over a countably infinite tree too. My point is that even though some things have technical similarities, in practice they are very different challenges.
- whatshisface 6y agoMath and chess are both very easy to check. Proof checkers and chess rule checkers both exist. "Conversation checkers" do not.
- ellis-bell 6y agochess is actually not very easy to check. chess is in exp, the class of problems requiring exponential time to solve and exponential time to check. unlike p vs np we do know that exp \neq p.
- whatshisface 6y agoIt takes O(n) to check if a chess game follows the rules, and to check who wins. Same for checking a proof written in CoQ. What do you mean by "check?"