5 ms·

AI is not a horse (2023) https://essays.georgestrakhov.com/ai-is-not-a-horse/ https://essays.georgestrakhov.com/ai-is-not-a-horse/

baxtr 9mo ago
Maybe AI is a centaur??
- GlobalFrog 9mo ago
  Or a reverse-centaur ? https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-reverse-centaurs/ https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-revers...
- Sharlin 9mo ago
  Or a reverse centaur [1]. [1] https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-reverse-centaurs/ https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-revers...
- jeanlucas 9mo ago
  Baxtr, JAMES BAXTR? That's the exact comment I'd expect of someone named that.
- Symmetry 9mo ago
  After Deep Blue Garry Kapsparav proposed "Centaur Chess"[1] where teams of humans and computers would complete with each other. For about a decade a team like that was superior to either an unaided computer or an unaided AI. These days pure AI teams tend to be much stronger. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess
  - ffsm8 9mo ago
    How would pure ai ever be "much stronger" in this scenario? That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever, it can only be "equally strong", making the approach non-viable because they're not providing any value... But the only way for the human in the loop to add an actual demerit, you'd have to include time taken for each move into the final score, which isn't normal in chess. But I'm not knowledgeable on the topic, I'm just expressing my surprise and inability to contextualize this claim with my minor experience of the game
    - plomme 9mo ago
      Why? If the human has final say on which play to make I can certainly see them thinking they are proposing a better strategy when they are actually hurting their chances.
    - Symmetry 9mo ago
      If you had a setup where the computer just did its thing and never waited for the human to provide input but the human still had an unused button they could press to get a chance to say something that might technically count as "centaur", but that isn't really what people mean by the term. It's the delay in waiting for human input that's the big disadvantage centaur setups have when the human isn't really providing any value these days.
      - ffsm8 9mo ago
        But why would that be a disadvantage large enough to cause the player to lose, which would be necessary for > pure AI teams tend to be much stronger. Maybe each turn has a time limit, and a human would need "n moments" to make the final judgement call whereas the AI could delay the final decision right to the last moment for it's final analysis? So the pure AI player gets an additional 10-30s to simulate the game essentially?
        Symmetry 9mo ago
        It's not that each turn has a time limit but that each player has a time limit to spend across the entire game.
    - famouswaffles 9mo ago
      You can be so far ahead of someone, their input (if you act on it) can only make things worse. That's it. If a human 'teams up' with chess AI today and does anything other than agree with its moves, it will just drag things down.
      - ffsm8 9mo ago
  - pixl97 9mo ago
    With intelligence of models seeming spikey/lumpy I suspect we'll see tasks and domains fall to AI one at a time. Some will happen quickly and others may take far longer than we expect.
egeozcan 9mo ago
We don't know it, up to the point we observe it.
- zombot 9mo ago
  But since the act of observation influences the object observed, who knows what then becomes of it?
- Almondsetat 9mo ago
  AI is a quantum mechanic
  - willrshansen 9mo ago
    AI is a quantum horse

baxtr 9mo ago

Maybe AI is a centaur??

GlobalFrog 9mo ago
Or a reverse-centaur ? https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-reverse-centaurs/ https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-revers...
Sharlin 9mo ago
Or a reverse centaur [1]. [1] https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-reverse-centaurs/ https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-revers...
jeanlucas 9mo ago
Baxtr, JAMES BAXTR? That's the exact comment I'd expect of someone named that.
Symmetry 9mo ago
After Deep Blue Garry Kapsparav proposed "Centaur Chess"[1] where teams of humans and computers would complete with each other. For about a decade a team like that was superior to either an unaided computer or an unaided AI. These days pure AI teams tend to be much stronger. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess
- ffsm8 9mo ago
  How would pure ai ever be "much stronger" in this scenario? That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever, it can only be "equally strong", making the approach non-viable because they're not providing any value... But the only way for the human in the loop to add an actual demerit, you'd have to include time taken for each move into the final score, which isn't normal in chess. But I'm not knowledgeable on the topic, I'm just expressing my surprise and inability to contextualize this claim with my minor experience of the game
  - plomme 9mo ago
    Why? If the human has final say on which play to make I can certainly see them thinking they are proposing a better strategy when they are actually hurting their chances.
  - Symmetry 9mo ago
    If you had a setup where the computer just did its thing and never waited for the human to provide input but the human still had an unused button they could press to get a chance to say something that might technically count as "centaur", but that isn't really what people mean by the term. It's the delay in waiting for human input that's the big disadvantage centaur setups have when the human isn't really providing any value these days.
    - ffsm8 9mo ago
      But why would that be a disadvantage large enough to cause the player to lose, which would be necessary for > pure AI teams tend to be much stronger. Maybe each turn has a time limit, and a human would need "n moments" to make the final judgement call whereas the AI could delay the final decision right to the last moment for it's final analysis? So the pure AI player gets an additional 10-30s to simulate the game essentially?
      - Symmetry 9mo ago
        It's not that each turn has a time limit but that each player has a time limit to spend across the entire game.
  - famouswaffles 9mo ago
    You can be so far ahead of someone, their input (if you act on it) can only make things worse. That's it. If a human 'teams up' with chess AI today and does anything other than agree with its moves, it will just drag things down.
    - ffsm8 9mo ago
- pixl97 9mo ago
  With intelligence of models seeming spikey/lumpy I suspect we'll see tasks and domains fall to AI one at a time. Some will happen quickly and others may take far longer than we expect.

egeozcan 9mo ago

We don't know it, up to the point we observe it.

zombot 9mo ago
But since the act of observation influences the object observed, who knows what then becomes of it?
Almondsetat 9mo ago
AI is a quantum mechanic
- willrshansen 9mo ago
  AI is a quantum horse