6 ms·
Still begging the question using fuzzy terms. "If computers are sort of good they are very good!" That statement doesn't mean anything concrete. Don't the rece
by naveensundar 17y ago
Still begging the question using fuzzy terms. "If computers are sort of good they are very good!" That statement doesn't mean anything concrete. Don't the recent results in GO invalidate : if(computers can compete) {humans have to be perfect} ? When does the conditional get satisfied? The moment there is a basic implementation which follows all the rules of the game or according to some fuzzy notion of "compete" which gets changed conveniently :)
- rwolf 17y agoThe poster you replied to did not say Go-bots were competitive yet. He said they had shown a lack of progress in the face of increasing resources until recently. The only thing I'm saying here is that your counterexample does not make sense because Go-bots are famously bad at Go.
- naveensundar 17y ago>The only thing I'm saying here is that your counterexample does not make sense because Go-bots are famously bad at Go. I don't think so. Please see the link below: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Go#Recent_results http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Go#Recent_results Of course you can still refuse the recent results, and say they are not competitive :)
- xiaoma 17y agoIn the simplest terms, it means that AI performance is less variable. A computer that can give you a good match on a good day will beat you on the days you're tired, distracted, or ill. And the computer won't have bad days. Conversely, if you're a bit better than the computer and manage to find a few of its weaknesses, you can exploit them again and again and it will never learn how to stop you (in any AI I've played against).