3 ms·
This is like saying chess engines don't actually "play" chess, even though they trounce grandmasters. It's a meaningless distinction, about words (think, reason
by fenomas 7mo ago
This is like saying chess engines don't actually "play" chess, even though they trounce grandmasters. It's a meaningless distinction, about words (think, reason, ..) that have no firm definitions.
- trick-or-treat 7mo agoThis exactly. The proof is in the pudding. If AI pudding is as good as (or better than) human pudding, and you continue to complain about it anyway... You're just being biased and unreasonable. And by the way, I don't think it's surprising that so many people are being unreasonable on this issue, there is a lot at stake and it's implications are transformative.
- razorbeamz 7mo agoChess engines are not a comparable thing. Chess is a solved game. There is always a mathematically perfect move.
- sincerely 7mo agoChess is absolutely not a solved game, outside of very limited situations like endgames. Just because a best move exists does not mean we (or even an engine) know what it is
- trick-or-treat 7mo ago> Chess is a solved game. There is always a mathematically perfect move. This is a good example of being confidently misinformed. The best move is always a result of calculation. And the calculation can always go deeper or run on a stronger engine.
- Scarblac 7mo agoWe know that chess can be solved, in theory. It absolutely isn't and probably will never be in practice. The necessary time and storage space doesn't exist.