3 ms·

> a mathematical puzzle that is mostly trivia "Solving" a game is not "trivia" or a "puzzle". It's an actual mathematical problem that requires nontrivial proo

> a mathematical puzzle that is mostly trivia "Solving" a game is not "trivia" or a "puzzle". It's an actual mathematical problem that requires nontrivial proofs for nontrivial games. Think about it: a game as "simple" as checkers was only solved in 2007. > I suspect that the best computer Othello algorithm can already trounce a human. That's a completely different problem. Chess computers are much, much better than humans, but chess is far from being solved.

sebzim4500 3y ago
It's not obvious to me that othello is much more complicated than checkers. Admittedly, I haven't played since I was a kid and I don't completely remember what the rules are.
- WoodenChair 3y ago
  So you don't really know much about the computational complexity of the game and you're saying it's trivial. How hard a game is to "solve" at least using traditional algorithmic techniques is related to its search space. That is a combination of the length of the game and the number of possible moves in each position (ply and branching factor). Chess has more possible positions than exist atoms in the universe by some estimates. Checkers has a tractable, for modern supercomputers, 500 billion possible positions with about a ~6 branching factor over an average of ~50 ply games. Othello is several orders of magnitude more complex than checkers but not quite at the level of chess. So, this is a big claim. It's by no means trivial.
  - kbenson 3y ago
    The person you're responding to wasn't the one that said it was "trivia" (much less trivial). I don't think anyone was saying it's easy, just that they didn't think it was very useful to know.
    - WoodenChair 3y ago
      The post I'm replying to said: > It's not obvious to me that othello is much more complicated than checkers. How is that not saying it's trivial when the context is a thread mentioning that Checkers has already been solved.
      - kbenson 3y ago
        In the past, "solving" games has often been done through novel changes in hardware and/or approaches and algorithms as I understand it. The person you replied to stated that they didn't know why Othello was an achievement beyond checkers. That doesn't mean it's trivial, but it also doesn't mean it required any additional insight or advances to do so if it's not specifically more complicated than checkers. They then went on to qualify their statement with the information that they don't specifically remember the rules of Othello. In a discussion held in good faith, this should be assumed to be an invitation to add additional insight as to why Othello might be more complicated. You either know the reason why and didn't state it, or believe it's more complicated based on authorities you trust and didn't relate that and instead stated it authoritatively, or don't know it at all and misrepresented it. None of those are very useful for discussion. The former two are easy to rectify by explaining, qualifying, or referring someone to additional info though, and would have been a more useful way to respond. Ultimately though, it sort of feels like you're reaching for an additional interpretation that makes an earlier misinterpretation still valid, when you could just say "oops. Most of my comment still stands as accurate, but I guess I misinterpreted your point." Edit: from looking at you profile, it appears you are a CS professor. Perhaps part of the issue is context. This is a public forum, not a classroom, and while in a classroom your statements can be taken with an assumed authority, nobody necessarily knows that about you here when you post, so some additional qualification of your statements or background may be warranted.
        WoodenChair 3y ago
        Reread my comments in "good faith" as you say and you won't need to write four paragraphs critiquing my one paragraph comment.
  - sebzim4500 3y ago
    I don't think either Othello or Checkers are trivial to solve. Checkers was solved over 18 years.
    - WoodenChair 3y ago
      I didn't say Checkers was trivial to solve. I said Othello is much harder to solve than Checkers and therefore not trivial to solve as OP implied. I think the OP was saying that since Checkers is solved and they "think" Othello is similar it would be easy to solve, implying that since we can do one we can do the other. I was disputing that notion.

sebzim4500 3y ago

It's not obvious to me that othello is much more complicated than checkers. Admittedly, I haven't played since I was a kid and I don't completely remember what the rules are.

WoodenChair 3y ago
So you don't really know much about the computational complexity of the game and you're saying it's trivial. How hard a game is to "solve" at least using traditional algorithmic techniques is related to its search space. That is a combination of the length of the game and the number of possible moves in each position (ply and branching factor). Chess has more possible positions than exist atoms in the universe by some estimates. Checkers has a tractable, for modern supercomputers, 500 billion possible positions with about a ~6 branching factor over an average of ~50 ply games. Othello is several orders of magnitude more complex than checkers but not quite at the level of chess. So, this is a big claim. It's by no means trivial.
- kbenson 3y ago
  The person you're responding to wasn't the one that said it was "trivia" (much less trivial). I don't think anyone was saying it's easy, just that they didn't think it was very useful to know.
  - WoodenChair 3y ago
    The post I'm replying to said: > It's not obvious to me that othello is much more complicated than checkers. How is that not saying it's trivial when the context is a thread mentioning that Checkers has already been solved.
    - kbenson 3y ago
      In the past, "solving" games has often been done through novel changes in hardware and/or approaches and algorithms as I understand it. The person you replied to stated that they didn't know why Othello was an achievement beyond checkers. That doesn't mean it's trivial, but it also doesn't mean it required any additional insight or advances to do so if it's not specifically more complicated than checkers. They then went on to qualify their statement with the information that they don't specifically remember the rules of Othello. In a discussion held in good faith, this should be assumed to be an invitation to add additional insight as to why Othello might be more complicated. You either know the reason why and didn't state it, or believe it's more complicated based on authorities you trust and didn't relate that and instead stated it authoritatively, or don't know it at all and misrepresented it. None of those are very useful for discussion. The former two are easy to rectify by explaining, qualifying, or referring someone to additional info though, and would have been a more useful way to respond. Ultimately though, it sort of feels like you're reaching for an additional interpretation that makes an earlier misinterpretation still valid, when you could just say "oops. Most of my comment still stands as accurate, but I guess I misinterpreted your point." Edit: from looking at you profile, it appears you are a CS professor. Perhaps part of the issue is context. This is a public forum, not a classroom, and while in a classroom your statements can be taken with an assumed authority, nobody necessarily knows that about you here when you post, so some additional qualification of your statements or background may be warranted.
      - WoodenChair 3y ago
        Reread my comments in "good faith" as you say and you won't need to write four paragraphs critiquing my one paragraph comment.
- sebzim4500 3y ago
  I don't think either Othello or Checkers are trivial to solve. Checkers was solved over 18 years.
  - WoodenChair 3y ago
    I didn't say Checkers was trivial to solve. I said Othello is much harder to solve than Checkers and therefore not trivial to solve as OP implied. I think the OP was saying that since Checkers is solved and they "think" Othello is similar it would be easy to solve, implying that since we can do one we can do the other. I was disputing that notion.