4 ms·

What is your point out of interest?

• oska 4y ago
  Not the person who you posed the question to, but I believe their point may be that Go is a fully described game, a constrained 'space' even if that space is remarkably deep. Our world is not a fully described game (unless you want to take a radical philosophical position, and in which case we still don't know the rules of this game). We talk about and think about this world in language. Training a machine on human language and then after training, having that machine take language inputs and generate language outputs is not the same as training a machine to 'play' Go because the two worlds they have been trained in (1. the game of Go; 2. the real world) are fundamentally not equivalent.