Steadystrike Nah. Professional Go players hardly get to capture at all. Their opponents are just to good to waste moves that don't do much. It's when you have the 20 kyus play the 30 kyus you get the entire board captured.
+ChessNetwork They do use clocks in tournaments and the game then will last 1-6 hours. How ever some professional games will be even longer than 16 hours and those games are the spread out over several days.
+ChessNetwork They do use clocks. There are various time variants, blitz games can take around 30 minutes, while tournament games can take up to 3 hours.
Kind of disappointed that we didn't hear about this until after the fact, and that they chose to go the traditional way with a Nature paper instead of sharing every little advance immediately at arxiv as seems to be the (happy!) norm in ML these days. But very, very excited to read more about their approach, and a BIG congratulations is in order!
I've been following this news for awhile now. I'm glad to see there's some progress in this area. Almost two decades ago Deep Blue defeated GM Gary Kasparov and more recently Komodo 24 just beat GM Nakamuru. It was estimated that some people would be able to develop AI to defeat humans at this game right about now and here it is. I'll definitely be following the March match.
If you had two of these machines playing each other would it be the same game every time? Or is there a level of randomness to the choices it makes even when it looks 20 moves into the future? I would really be interested in in seeing what would happen.
+Noah Brink-Goodman Well, theoretically the losing computer (and possibly the winning one as well) would learn from their mistakes while playing, meaning they'd make different choices the next time. Does depend on whether the creators and operators of these programs decide to turn the "learning-feature" on during the matches.
Just nitpicking: the objective is not to control more than 50% of the board, but to control more than your opponent does. For example, Black controls 45% and White control 40% => Black wins. E.g. seki is more usual than one would think.
i learned about this game from a manga called hikaru no go. i learned a bit about go but the story was still interesting and fun without knowing much about the game
+SlipKnotRicky Then you'll having someone trying to get 1000 brown M&M's in the middle of the night, and that almost always ends up with someone getting beat to death with their own shoes. True story.
Lee Saedol is an interesting choice: he is the most unpredictable and creative player at that level. Commentators have hard time "explaining" his moves.
what I'm wondering is, did alphaGo learn to play from pixels like the neural nets that played the atari games? IMO, it would be great if did and if only one neural network was used without the search procedures. Good progress though.
I never considered that the holy grail of artificial intelligence would be so close to attainment in my lifetime. What a fascinating development! It is very telling of how hard people are working to develop the field of AI. I cannot wait to see the results of the match in March.
If it makes anyone feel any better. A.I. still has a long ways to go in video game play. An elite level Donkey Kong or Moon Patrol player would still easily beat AphaGo.
if we forced allowed... computer win with no draw and lose .can they build an AI playing chess? in fact I dont think any human program or self learning AI can do it its more difficult than Alpha go (playing chess without a draw and win most game)
@@smfanqingwu1474 Weqi has more possible variations than there are atoms in the universe a brute force approach to go would be impossible even with all the computing power on Earth combined.
This makes absolutely no sense. No-one claimed that there were no games that had more configurations, only that the number of configurations was more than about 10**80.
I doubt many scientists would've actually thought that computers could never play go. Brute force is obviously not feasible with the current technology, but computers are capable of more than just that as shown by these people.
Computer programs get to use clusters of cpus and gpus, so its only fair humans should be able to confer with other humans during a game and gang up against it.
Well, all the strategies described apply to computer chess as well. The thing is that Go needs an even stronger focus on heuristics compared to brute force but you can't play chess with pure brute force either.
How about shrinking the size of the board? That would reduce the amount of computations needed. Then just scale it up. The size of the board appears to be arbitrary. The strategy should be the same if the board is smaller.
the first general artificial intelligence would come out of puzzle games that mimics human speech and problem solving. If we make a game complex enough with the right human reinforcement learning; a game that f.ex. requires to do hard from scratch coding or solving a physics problem. Right now we don't have an architecture for this but soon enough we will lay the ground works for the deep-mind to improve to become Artificial general intelligence. The key is making games that are challenging enough such that it reflects some part of human abilities. Hold on tight it is going to be wild in the next decade or so.
4:05 A computer program that can beat high level go players is a very good achievement, the developers should be proud. But in what way is it akin to imagination? It's an algorithm, it computes numbers, it is only useful in a particular sets of conditions. Imagination is orders of magnitude more general.
Of course, nobody taught them what a personality (or soul) is. What is it btw? AlphaGo has never played Chess, so how good can it be at it. But... the *algorithm* that learned to play Go extremely well, would most likely learn to play Chess extremely well, or maybe with some more tweaks and improvements learn to drive a car through traffic, or guess the best stocks to buy or sell or etc. etc.... The "imagination" in us humans is in fact our own *algorithm*, which is implemented in our *hardware* (the brain) just like AlphaGo's DNN was implemented in some computer cluster.
I hope that Lee Sedol doesn't succumb to the pressure like Kasparov did against Deep Blue. I also hope that they give him access to some recent version of the program prior to the match; chess computers tend to have certain exploitable weaknesses, and you don't play against them like you play against humans... it would be interesting to see if a top go player with sufficient time can come up with something similar, or if the complexity of the game stymies such approaches.
He is beating Se-Dol Lee(Former champion of this game) with score of 2-0 out of 5 games series. The most scariest thing is that commentating pro players couldn't even follow the move computer is doing, thinking its moves were often faulty. Only the player himself seemed shocked by creative and shockingly effective unconventional moves. gall.dcinside.com/board/view/?id=baduk&no=64184&page=1&search_pos=&s_type=search_all&s_keyword=%ED%95%9C%EC%88%98
It's like 2 groups breaking out of prison. I have a twin dial to know it's fair a barometer and an altimeter in my watch. Aren't they correlated? It can help break even if you are stuck at homes forgetting basics so that someone may come for you. And also a new couple reuniting will find it horrible for one game but live for ever even if seperated globally. Anti divorce Force was a dream. This game will extend life of the world. To keep the world running with use for 100 years.
The greatest contemporary go/weiqi player is in China, the Koreans once dominated but have been falling off lately. The Japanese have been silent for years now...
I would be hesitant to call Go the most complicated game that humans play. The game 'Diplomacy' also has a ridiculous amount of degrees of freedom as well as requiring other skills that AI cannot handle yet (natural language processing). There have been attempts to make AI for Diplomacy but they have not been great.
***** Hmmm. I was all set to agree with you but started thinking more about it. I would say that the complexity of Go has nothing to do with it's simple rule base and everything to do with the size of the board. After all, if the board was only a 4 x 4 grid with the exact same rules, would you still call it complex?
+Baichuan Ren Most recent ones use a monte carlo based tree search I think, or something like that. Apparently this one does too, but have an upper layer to reduce the tree beforehand.
The exponential is speeding up. This wasn't supposed to happen for another 10 years. Also, check out the new Atlas video from Boston Dynamics. As for Go, I'll pass. Now where is my $200?
I'm a big proponent of neural nets but I wouldn't use them for go, no more than I would chess. I understand that the branching is too great for simple brute force but it's still a sharp logic game where neural nets are not naturally strong. I'm surprised that NN is the first successful approach for go. I would actually argue that go is a game where the soft logic of the human brain is inherently weak and that a brutally more powerful computer approach exists. Not to be remiss and ignore this result.
A powerful tool. However seeing as where humanity is at the moment and how much stupidity there is among humans, this tool would also be immensely dangerous if misused. Which is why i am more concerned about the prevalent thinking of humans, our values and behaviour rather than technology itself.
"More configurations in the board than atoms in the universe" - this is just a phrase to impress. A string with 60 latin characters has more configurations than atoms in the universe. Does this make a text string particularly interesting o difficult to treat?
This is chess on steroids. Next machines will make great jokes. And soon enough they will excel at everything we do. And we will turn into them as we touch the stars.
mastertheillusion you should take a look at the channel "Nicholson 1968". He knows a lot about transhumanism, the same thing you are talking about. But he's not so optimistic.
I play chess and can grasp the quality of a computer players skill, but Go is a complete mystery. Does anyone who plays the game have an opinion on its style of play?
What happens when AlphaGo learns that winning can upset or scare people? Will it start losing on purpose to maintain equilibrium or dumb itself down so that it's more fun to play against? Or is it only interested in crushing the human spirit?
+Paul Almeida-Seele You're projecting human sentiments onto a program, it wouldn't 'learn' that winning upsets people, it just does what it is programmed to, which is win at Go.
+NotSoIrish I was joking, but it's worth thinking about. Let's say it was programmed to 'play' Go, rather than 'win'. Assuming that people lose interest in a game if they feel like they can never beat it. It would learn to throw a few games in order to achieve the goal of playing Go. Like a really advanced slot machine, I guess.
After the computer beats the human what last actions remain? A. The defeated human leaves. B. The computer terminates the defeated human opponent Or...
Conventional aimbots and hacks rely on sniffing game memory and seeing where the players are in the game files. I'm sure an AI that recognizes players in game by just capturing the screen wouldn't be too hard though, probably easier than Go.
This game should be played with M&Ms or some other candy. You can then eat opponent's candy when you capture it.
+Filip Voska It has been done. You can do this with chess too: weiqi-to-go.net/2015/02/26/chess-and-go-tourney-pays-in-candy/
+Filip Voska Then half the professional go players will be diabetic
+Steadystrike
That is the chess community's evil plan.
Most ideal candy would have to be Reese's Pieces. They only have 3 colors.
Steadystrike Nah. Professional Go players hardly get to capture at all. Their opponents are just to good to waste moves that don't do much. It's when you have the 20 kyus play the 30 kyus you get the entire board captured.
"it was stronger than perhaps we were expecting." @5:00
that is not something I want an AI developer to say, ever.
+Isaac Garcia (dzdkidd6) speechless
+Isaac Garcia (dzdkidd6) so true, lol
+tapu nima The programmer guy with short hair seems quite modest and in a different level even though he is way above most academic professors.
No one programmed AlphaGo.
It programmed itself.
It's a Neuronal-Network.
That's why it won in the end.
Just laughed my ass off, this is so scary and true. It's only a matter of time...
In chess, the use of clocks are pretty standard. I don't see any being used for Go.
How long does a game of Go last for typically?
+ChessNetwork They do use clocks in tournaments and the game then will last 1-6 hours. How ever some professional games will be even longer than 16 hours and those games are the spread out over several days.
+ChessNetwork They do use clocks. There are various time variants, blitz games can take around 30 minutes, while tournament games can take up to 3 hours.
+McRoos Ahh. Okay thanks. I can see why it'd take so long. 6ish hours is a ballpark duration for a tournament chess game.
hi Jerry!
+alivfishland Did you like the squid?
Alright computers, come take over the world already.
+Ozymandias I wish i could live long enough to be destroyed by a computer.
+RAIN LOL
+Ozymandias they already have... how many people do you think could make it through a day without their smart phones?
Quantum Uncertainty Workshop He means AI, phones are useless without a human.
i was being cynical...
Put the computers against each other to see the greatest go match ever.
If the AI are same than the result will be draw upto 94.3%.
@@sjzz There's no draw in Go if you play by common rules.
Kind of disappointed that we didn't hear about this until after the fact, and that they chose to go the traditional way with a Nature paper instead of sharing every little advance immediately at arxiv as seems to be the (happy!) norm in ML these days.
But very, very excited to read more about their approach, and a BIG congratulations is in order!
but can it beat hikaru ?
Walwalkn Wewnrkl
you are correct :)
+Afro ThuGz Maybe there is a ghost in the machine... the ghost of an ancient Go master.
Anders Öhlund
it will first need a new firmware to support the ghost
+Walwalkn Wewnrkl The AI did what Sai could only dream of doing, play the divine move!
+Afro ThuGz You mean Sai.
Who is Sai anyway?
lolol
"It was stronger than perhaps we were expecting" - Not really what you want to hear when dealing with AI.
+neon32 This, exactly.
i have mastered go fish
you have 6 of diamonds?
yaaas
+Tabulus Rasa No, go fish. (hehe, he'll never find out.)
Well I guess computers can now collect $200. Because they have...
Passed Go
Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha,Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, at least 15 of us got your joke!
Brilliant Joke. Well done
Absolutely disgusting
Ooof
I've been following this news for awhile now. I'm glad to see there's some progress in this area. Almost two decades ago Deep Blue defeated GM Gary Kasparov and more recently Komodo 24 just beat GM Nakamuru. It was estimated that some people would be able to develop AI to defeat humans at this game right about now and here it is. I'll definitely be following the March match.
I, for one, welcome our computer overlords.
+Jeffery Liggett ken jennings after the watson challenge
+Jeffery Liggett Google Overlords*
+Jeffery Liggett You are just trying to brown-nose before the apocalypse. It won't work.
Here here!!!
So it begins..
If you had two of these machines playing each other would it be the same game every time? Or is there a level of randomness to the choices it makes even when it looks 20 moves into the future? I would really be interested in in seeing what would happen.
+Noah Brink-Goodman
Well, theoretically the losing computer (and possibly the winning one as well) would learn from their mistakes while playing, meaning they'd make different choices the next time.
Does depend on whether the creators and operators of these programs decide to turn the "learning-feature" on during the matches.
Great question!
This thought blew my mind.
Oddly, no, it doesn't for the past 6 years the 'best' AI have continually been upping each other.
Just nitpicking: the objective is not to control more than 50% of the board, but to control more than your opponent does. For example, Black controls 45% and White control 40% => Black wins. E.g. seki is more usual than one would think.
+Nam Thai Think it depends on the ruleset.
+Jesus Christ Not really. Seki is a standard situation no matter what kind of Go you are playing.
+lollerskatez1 Stop saying 'not really'. A simple 'no' will suffice.
Stop making orders. A simple suggestion would suffice :)
lollerskatez1 I hurt your feelings.
And don't say, "Not really" like I know you are going to.
Added to our favourites playlist.
It even just beat Lee Sedol 4 games out of 5. Couldn't believe it.
"We're quietly confident that who knows what will happen."
Wow; a Quantum Leap in computer go...
We won't ever be absole to beat Sai !!!
i learned about this game from a manga called hikaru no go. i learned a bit about go but the story was still interesting and fun without knowing much about the game
Cool. a game that you play with Mentos and M&M's...................
+SlipKnotRicky
Impossible. Every time I play with those pieces, they mysteriously disappear.
Cabhan Listis Yep, same here....
+SlipKnotRicky Hahaha, yeah. I was thinking Junior Mints for the dark ones.
+SlipKnotRicky Then you'll having someone trying to get 1000 brown M&M's in the middle of the night, and that almost always ends up with someone getting beat to death with their own shoes. True story.
+SlipKnotRicky what about reversi/othello?
Where are the 5 Games against Fan Hui?
+David Ongaro here they are. www.usgo.org/news/2016/01/alphago-beats-pro-5-0-in-major-ai-advance/
+Bob Hearn Thanks, appreciate it
+David Ongaro Here you can replay all 5 games online:
www.go-baduk-weiqi.de/google-schlaegt-go-profi/
Lee Saedol is an interesting choice: he is the most unpredictable and creative player at that level. Commentators have hard time "explaining" his moves.
When will this become public? I want to practice go without setting up with a board.
If Honinbō Shūsai sees this computer, he would be amazed by human's technology and progress.
what I'm wondering is, did alphaGo learn to play from pixels like the neural nets that played the atari games? IMO, it would be great if did and if only one neural network was used without the search procedures. Good progress though.
are there any good documentaries on the history of 'Go' ? I want to see more about the masters of Go throughout history.
Alphago is the best documentary
Very good video. Good work, proud of you. (:
I've only mastered counting Go:-(
I agree :-)
I am a house champion of GO fish.
I never considered that the holy grail of artificial intelligence would be so close to attainment in my lifetime.
What a fascinating development! It is very telling of how hard people are working to develop the field of AI.
I cannot wait to see the results of the match in March.
If it makes anyone feel any better. A.I. still has a long ways to go in video game play. An elite level Donkey Kong or Moon Patrol player would still easily beat AphaGo.
they've got us beat in Tetris though.
Can't believe I just watched the promotional video for Skynet and kinda amazed by it...
I'll be back.
They should get it ranked to see how many Dan AlphaGo has =)
Was a komi value used to balance to final score? Also what color was the AI playing? Regardless, this is a great improvement!
Go is the game of black and white mentos, yummy
the winner keeps all the mentos
if we forced allowed... computer win with no draw and lose .can they build an AI playing chess? in fact I dont think any human program or self learning AI can do it its more difficult than Alpha go (playing chess without a draw and win most game)
@@smfanqingwu1474 Weqi has more possible variations than there are atoms in the universe a brute force approach to go would be impossible even with all the computing power on Earth combined.
such a bold statement saying theres more configurations than atoms in universe. same board with one more row already have more conf.
This makes absolutely no sense. No-one claimed that there were no games that had more configurations, only that the number of configurations was more than about 10**80.
I doubt many scientists would've actually thought that computers could never play go. Brute force is obviously not feasible with the current technology, but computers are capable of more than just that as shown by these people.
+Rented Mule I'd say that 10 years ago, many were *unsure* whether it would ever be possible. If it was ever to be done, they didn't know *how*.
Computer programs get to use clusters of cpus and gpus, so its only fair humans should be able to confer with other humans during a game and gang up against it.
Incidentaly, the AI was also possessed with the spirit of an ancient Go master who wanted to play the perfect game.
Well, all the strategies described apply to computer chess as well. The thing is that Go needs an even stronger focus on heuristics compared to brute force but you can't play chess with pure brute force either.
Is it possible that this (type of) program could beat Stockfish in the near future or is that still way off?
Congratulations to the team!
How about shrinking the size of the board? That would reduce the amount of computations needed. Then just scale it up. The size of the board appears to be arbitrary. The strategy should be the same if the board is smaller.
Humanities famous last words: "It was stronger than we were expecting."
the first general artificial intelligence would come out of puzzle games that mimics human speech and problem solving. If we make a game complex enough with the right human reinforcement learning; a game that f.ex. requires to do hard from scratch coding or solving a physics problem. Right now we don't have an architecture for this but soon enough we will lay the ground works for the deep-mind to improve to become Artificial general intelligence. The key is making games that are challenging enough such that it reflects some part of human abilities. Hold on tight it is going to be wild in the next decade or so.
Dr. Demis Hassabis, you played Go a little bit often, right??
4:05 A computer program that can beat high level go players is a very good achievement, the developers should be proud. But in what way is it akin to imagination? It's an algorithm, it computes numbers, it is only useful in a particular sets of conditions. Imagination is orders of magnitude more general.
Of course, nobody taught them what a personality (or soul) is. What is it btw? AlphaGo has never played Chess, so how good can it be at it. But... the *algorithm* that learned to play Go extremely well, would most likely learn to play Chess extremely well, or maybe with some more tweaks and improvements learn to drive a car through traffic, or guess the best stocks to buy or sell or etc. etc.... The "imagination" in us humans is in fact our own *algorithm*, which is implemented in our *hardware* (the brain) just like AlphaGo's DNN was implemented in some computer cluster.
What's the point?
I hope that Lee Sedol doesn't succumb to the pressure like Kasparov did against Deep Blue. I also hope that they give him access to some recent version of the program prior to the match; chess computers tend to have certain exploitable weaknesses, and you don't play against them like you play against humans... it would be interesting to see if a top go player with sufficient time can come up with something similar, or if the complexity of the game stymies such approaches.
He is beating Se-Dol Lee(Former champion of this game) with score of 2-0 out of 5 games series. The most scariest thing is that commentating pro players couldn't even follow the move computer is doing, thinking its moves were often faulty. Only the player himself seemed shocked by creative and shockingly effective unconventional moves. gall.dcinside.com/board/view/?id=baduk&no=64184&page=1&search_pos=&s_type=search_all&s_keyword=%ED%95%9C%EC%88%98
It's like 2 groups breaking out of prison. I have a twin dial to know it's fair a barometer and an altimeter in my watch. Aren't they correlated? It can help break even if you are stuck at homes forgetting basics so that someone may come for you. And also a new couple reuniting will find it horrible for one game but live for ever even if seperated globally. Anti divorce Force was a dream. This game will extend life of the world. To keep the world running with use for 100 years.
The greatest contemporary go/weiqi player is in China, the Koreans once dominated but have been falling off lately. The Japanese have been silent for years now...
SAI IS BACK! He's trapped in a computer!
Nathan Rogers Here I am a year later desperately looking for a comment about Sai!!! and i finally found it lol
"It was stronger than perhaps we were expecting"...
But can it dodge?
Darren Aronofsky's "PI" anyone?
They did it. Things are changing...
"you scared, Nash" "mortified, petrified, stupifided, by you"
If it can beat a professional go player it can dodge a wrench. XD
Wow. We are handing our world to the computers just like that. It's crazy!
i was wondering what material stones they were using, they look pretty :0
Probably Yunzi stones made in China.
I would be hesitant to call Go the most complicated game that humans play. The game 'Diplomacy' also has a ridiculous amount of degrees of freedom as well as requiring other skills that AI cannot handle yet (natural language processing).
There have been attempts to make AI for Diplomacy but they have not been great.
+Terry R GO is the most complicated board game with perfect information i.e. there are no "hidden" moves. I think that's what they meant.
+Terry R I'll consider an AI to be general when it can play Avalon. Conniving, deception and reading people and all :)
***** Hmmm. I was all set to agree with you but started thinking more about it. I would say that the complexity of Go has nothing to do with it's simple rule base and everything to do with the size of the board. After all, if the board was only a 4 x 4 grid with the exact same rules, would you still call it complex?
Terence Gui Yes, I agree with you.
I would not dispute that claim.
Frankly speaking.. If Com beat human in Go game, I'm excited and frightened. Go's future is chaos.
So, what about those GO computer games AIs? They certainly don't tree search each move till the end game. What are those programs about?
+Baichuan Ren Most recent ones use a monte carlo based tree search I think, or something like that. Apparently this one does too, but have an upper layer to reduce the tree beforehand.
+Richard Rondu Interesting, I will look into it, thx btw.
+Baichuan Ren You're welcome ;-)
Its not very fun when designer of a deep mind algorithm says "It was stronger than what we thought"
Is AlphaGo made in Go (golang) - Google's programming language?
No yo
what happens when someone accidently slightly hits the board with an elbow?
The exponential is speeding up. This wasn't supposed to happen for another 10 years. Also, check out the new Atlas video from Boston Dynamics. As for Go, I'll pass. Now where is my $200?
Sry big cheese ate it.
Nice to know how large a handicap the human world champion will need to get an even chance to the computer champ.
I want to take this positively but...
Nonetheless, revived my pride as a Go player.
I'm a big proponent of neural nets but I wouldn't use them for go, no more than I would chess. I understand that the branching is too great for simple brute force but it's still a sharp logic game where neural nets are not naturally strong. I'm surprised that NN is the first successful approach for go. I would actually argue that go is a game where the soft logic of the human brain is inherently weak and that a brutally more powerful computer approach exists. Not to be remiss and ignore this result.
A powerful tool. However seeing as where humanity is at the moment and how much stupidity there is among humans, this tool would also be immensely dangerous if misused. Which is why i am more concerned about the prevalent thinking of humans, our values and behaviour rather than technology itself.
"More configurations in the board than atoms in the universe" - this is just a phrase to impress. A string with 60 latin characters has more configurations than atoms in the universe. Does this make a text string particularly interesting o difficult to treat?
I prefer playing Shogi than Go.
It already has an AI, and beaten professional Shogi players consecutively.
I'm from Japan.
This is chess on steroids.
Next machines will make great jokes.
And soon enough they will excel at everything we do.
And we will turn into them as we touch the stars.
mastertheillusion you should take a look at the channel "Nicholson 1968". He knows a lot about transhumanism, the same thing you are talking about. But he's not so optimistic.
How long until I get a robot wife?
+Luke William when AI can develop unique personalities, and unique weaknesses, common sense, and emotions
+Xun Liew 2017 according to blade runner
+Xun Liew No that was actually a guy asking. When they can develop hot life like robots is the answer.
Luke William around 60-80 years probably
She would probably be better than a human one :).
5:33 GSV quietly confident
So what happens when AlphaGo plays itself? What can we learn from such a match?
the same thing it learns from other matches, not strategies that can increase the win percentage.
the conclusion statement is so true
I imagine ko fights would be one of the more difficult things to program. How did they figure that out?
Who else just watched/played the warframe sacrifice quest
Baduk! Reply 1988 fans anywhere?
The match was played recently, and alpha go won 4 out of 5 matches
it wasnt a total sweep!
They'll be beating us at Naughts and Crosses next.
Who did the music for this video?
I did not see any credits.
this software would be a good foundation for skynet
Scary or not: it's fascinating. Wheteher we like it or not, the machines are part of human evolution now...
I play chess and can grasp the quality of a computer players skill, but Go is a complete mystery. Does anyone who plays the game have an opinion on its style of play?
Amaging...I thought that was impossible until real AI(near human ability). So from now on I will accept "Real AI started..."
*ATARI* _Go_ Speed Racer, _Go_ team Alpha, *_Go!_*
AlphaGo VS AlphaGo
+Jeff The Ripper
That's literally a part of the programs creation, it played millions of matches against itself.
CPTANT who wins? a or b ?
+Jeff The Ripper The Winner is allowed to continue it's existance and make children, while the Looser brutally gets deleted.
It's a genetic algorithm.
Valentin Metz unless its in china. everybody can make many child
@@Feuermagier1337 thats a certain type of nueral network but not quite what they used
Go is truly an amazing game. (:
can alpha go transfer it's experenice to other games after learning the rules and limitations?
better yet can we transfer its ability to humans?
Essentially it can. It learned chess in 3.5 hours and beat the previous best chess bot (Stockfish) without losing a single game.
What happens when AlphaGo learns that winning can upset or scare people? Will it start losing on purpose to maintain equilibrium or dumb itself down so that it's more fun to play against? Or is it only interested in crushing the human spirit?
+Paul Almeida-Seele Not that advance....
+Paul Almeida-Seele You're projecting human sentiments onto a program, it wouldn't 'learn' that winning upsets people, it just does what it is programmed to, which is win at Go.
+NotSoIrish I was joking, but it's worth thinking about. Let's say it was programmed to 'play' Go, rather than 'win'. Assuming that people lose interest in a game if they feel like they can never beat it. It would learn to throw a few games in order to achieve the goal of playing Go. Like a really advanced slot machine, I guess.
This is like straight out of a scifi movie
4:15 finger cut
But can it win on a cold rainy night at stoke?
After the computer beats the human what last actions remain?
A. The defeated human leaves.
B. The computer terminates the defeated human opponent
Or...
Lee sedol was handily beaten, nothing else happened
The computer who mastered CS:GO
+Coolio Guy That would be AimBot?
Conventional aimbots and hacks rely on sniffing game memory and seeing where the players are in the game files. I'm sure an AI that recognizes players in game by just capturing the screen wouldn't be too hard though, probably easier than Go.
found out abought go 20 minutes ago love it