AI Can Beat Humans Only One Game At a Time (axios.com) 60
An anonymous reader shares a report: Despite all of the potential for artificial intelligence to solve our most vexing problems, it's still in a primitive state, according to a new report by Stanford University. But a separate paper, this one by Alphabet's DeepMind, suggests again that it has made some of its best progress in the narrow realm of games. Why it matters: Those advances are important, but life isn't a game. AI progress outside of these areas has been harder to define and track. "The most important thing for AI is to go from exceptional promise to use in actual everyday life," Martial Hebert, director of the Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, tells Axios.
Way too much effort being expended on AI (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing humans, we'll probably start working on Data but ship Lars. You see, deadlines kept slipping so we cut QA....
Re: (Score:2)
Not nearly enough on sexbot technology.
Yes! All the A.I. needed for that is just a few stock phrases like "Ooooh, you're so good" and "I don't know why the other girls don't get some of this!"
let's play Global Thermonuclear War! (Score:2)
let's play Global Thermonuclear War!
Re: (Score:1)
People who don't understand critical thinking... (Score:1)
... desperately hoping for A.I. that will do it for them so they never have to. This won't end well.
Re: (Score:2)
Primitive AI could prevent Dupes on Slashdot. (Score:5, Funny)
Just sayin'.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not. I'm a rugged individualist.
--
roman_mir
Re: (Score:2)
"AI Can Beat Humans Only One Game At a Time" headline straight after a story about AI beating various other human-beating AI's in several different games.
Yes. Several different games, played one at a time. The only thing that "Does not compute" is your reading comprehension.
Re: (Score:1)
So you can play chess, go, and bunch of other games simultaneously against multiple grandmasters and win all of those games?
Re: (Score:1)
It's only a matter of time (and not much time at all, I expect) before someone decides to train an AI on a range of board games together. Nothing very difficult about that, nothing fundamentally different, just a larger input space. It will be interesting to see how the different "algorithms" will end up sharing certain neural pathways between games while others will be specific to certain games.
Re: (Score:1)
And even more exciting will be to see how much time it takes to learn a new game after having been trained on other games. I can totally see this experiment happen any day now.
Re: (Score:2)
So you can play chess, go, and bunch of other games simultaneously against multiple grandmasters and win all of those games?
No, I can't. Neither can the AI, which was the original point.
Games *are* like real life (Score:2)
Primitive State (Score:1)
Yes indeed it is. You can't take an AI, of any form, raise it from a blob of generic neural nets, teach it english, then teach it to manipulate it's own robot arm, show it the chess rules wikipedia page, and have it play a game. Even if such an AI existed it might very well be a shitty chess player.
Current chess AI are very much tailored to playing chess, where the inputs and outputs are simple.
Someone will probably accuse me of moving the goalposts, demanding an ever better standard for what constitutes "r
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I can see that being difficult.
I disagree (Score:5, Interesting)
>life isn't a game
It can certainly be treated as one; the goal is to have the longest uninterrupted chemical reaction (I'm at around 4 billion years, personally). You can narrow that down to a 'minigame' where the goal is for an organism to successfully replicate (I'm losing there, since I've only managed replacement at 2.0 children and generally you want some redundancy just to be sure). And that game can also be divided into a number of mini-minigames.
A game is a contest with rules, goals, and a scoring system. In chess it's to checkmate your opponent and avoid being checkmated using a variety of pieces that move in certain ways on a limited checkered surface. In life it's a bit more complicated, but that doesn't mean treating it like a game is a flawed strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is: how does the AI know what the are rules of "life" it should be following. Is it what some creator like you told it the rules are e.x. "longest uninterrupted chemical reaction" or is it what the AI decides e.x. "kill all humans". Either case is filled with problems because neither will likely result in acceptable outcomes from a human's perspective.
I think you're confusing rules and goals. It's very unlikely that the computer will take a philosophy class, start pondering the meaning of its existence and set itself new goals. The problem is that our way of formulating the goal may not lead to the results we want, for example if we create a doctor bot and tell it the goal is no sick people it might decide that killing all humans is a valid way to achieve that. It's just not the solution we had in mind. As for the rules, they'd at the most basic level be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn''t tell if you're joking and I just don't find it funny or if you're serious and just politically bent.
A quick look through your posting history is not enlightening, as you careen wildly back and forth between rational posts and ones where I can almost see you frothing at the mouth as you're attacking the 'leftists' and the 'leftist media'.
Nuh uh (Score:2)
>life isn't a game
It can certainly be treated as one;
No way. If life can be treated as one, then where's my wall hacks and OP cheat codes? And don't tell me it's still loading or it bugged out with the stupid memory leaks.
/joke
Re: (Score:2)
It can certainly be treated as one; the goal is to have the longest uninterrupted chemical reaction (I'm at around 4 billion years, personally).
You can treat life as a game with that goal, but life doesn't have goals, just physics. Organisms have goals, but how do you measure a win? Personally, I do it through happiness, not offspring. I don't feel it's worth it to win at the expense of others, and unless you are living a hippie lifestyle predicated upon regenerative agriculture, your having children harms other people.
How much CPU power did AlphaZero get (Score:2)
Why do I think Stockfish was running on a 4 CPU box and AlphaZero running on something a few orders of magnitude greater?
AI does not exist (Score:2)
AI is BS (Score:2)
Intelligence is insight. The ability to apply one experience or idea to a different and unrelated concept. "the eureka" moment, the creative spark, curiosity... .
Today's computers do only task programming. A system is programmed to perform a specific task with predetermined parameters. I submit that using today's technology, AI is not even possible. Look at the hardware layer. A "massively parallel" system has what, a few dozen cores limited by bus of connectivity.
A brain, even an
Maybe we only think they're dumb (Score:1)
A smart machine will first consider which is more worth its while: to perform the given task or, instead, to figure some way out of it.
Stanislaw Lem, The Futurological Congress (1971).