3 ms·
It's an interesting puzzle, isn't it. On the one hand, the AIs are no good at playing Chess. However, on the other hand, if you ask an AI to win a game of ches
by roenxi 19d ago
It's an interesting puzzle, isn't it. On the one hand, the AIs are no good at playing Chess.
However, on the other hand, if you ask an AI to win a game of chess it has all the tools on hand to compete at the same level as Stockfish - it can re-implement an engine and even probably has a GPU on hand to train its own neural nets.
So should we say that the AI can play chess well, or that it cannot?
- tired-turtle 19d agoIs it, though? If you design and build a winning F1 race car, did you also win the race? Recent discourse around AI seems to conflate the semantics of winning: 1. you contributed to the win vs 2. you yourself were the winning driver.
- roenxi 19d agoBut the human would have to get extra hardware to do that. The AI isn't bringing in any resources it doesn't already have access to.
- kbau 19d agoI can compile stockfish from source and use it to beat other kids in my class in chess. Behold, I am a chess genius.