Page 3 of 3
Re: Did AlphaGo help spread the popularity of the game?
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:58 am
by Bill Spight
NiallMcC wrote:Hehehe, such confusion

!
Including yours, OC.
Lee being the last to be beaten means everyone else was already beaten (ok, an untested hypothesis,
Not an untested hypothesis, an untrue statement.
If john is the last kid to be fed, the others are not hungry.
Ever heard of
Oliver Twist?

Re: Did AlphaGo help spread the popularity of the game?
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 12:39 am
by NiallMcC
daal wrote:Lee Sedol was the last human left standing in the battle against computer supremacy.
That would be a better way of saying it

Re: Did AlphaGo help spread the popularity of the game?
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:00 am
by goTony
Kirby wrote:Stefany93 wrote:
Why do you wish it didn't happen? I also wished it didn't happen, but I am curious if your reason is the same as mine, lol.
My feelings are complicated, so it is difficult to precisely express the reason.
Someone from another thread expressed it better than I've been able to: for several years now, I've associated my personal identity with the game of go. For my job, I am a programmer, but more than a "computer scientist", I've associated myself with being a "go player". With AlphaGo's breakthrough, the game of go feels to have become a subset of "computer science", rather than an orthogonal endeavor. If I want to get closer to solving go, it would be better to pursue a computer solution, rather than studying go.
I used to feel "unique" or "special" in some ways. I had a unique interest in a game that not many people knew about or were good at. I had special knowledge of how the game worked. It made me, personally, feel special.
But in March, that "special" part of me died. The knowledge I've been pursuing through go no longer feels unique or special. It's just some extensive study I've done on one of the many problems that computers have solved. It makes what I've been studying feel less special and less significant. It makes go seem
ordinary.
It's not just with go. Another "special" part of me has been my study of language. I thought it was neat to know Korean and Japanese when many of my peers didn't. It gave me some sort of pride. But I read the other day that in a matter of years, foreign languages won't be an issue. Computer translation will have advanced such that people could carry microphones to do live translation. When that day comes, my Korean and Japanese abilities will not be special. They will not be unique. They will just be some obscure hobby I spent my time on, which doesn't really matter, since computers can do it better anyway.
Advancement in technology continues to make our lives easier. But as computers solve problems and make the world an easier place to live, it makes me personally feel less and less significant...
And perhaps, reminds me of my mortality, which computers do not share.
Alpha GO did win and rather convincingly. But did it enjoy the game? Could it say after the third game; "I am sorry Lee you have lost the match, and are not a challenge I wish to do something else with my time."
Did it know fear in the fourth game? Could it show awe at some moves the way the professional commentators did of the best of Lees and Alpha's moves? Will it share its memories of the match? Ultimately it is just a sophisticated calculator. Of course these "calculators" are more and more capable and are going to run most things in the near future.... Yes Lee showed he was a true champion, who fought to the end against nigh impossible odds. My Hat is off to him.
Re: Did AlphaGo help spread the popularity of the game?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:18 am
by Krama
goTony wrote:Kirby wrote:Stefany93 wrote:
Why do you wish it didn't happen? I also wished it didn't happen, but I am curious if your reason is the same as mine, lol.
My feelings are complicated, so it is difficult to precisely express the reason.
Someone from another thread expressed it better than I've been able to: for several years now, I've associated my personal identity with the game of go. For my job, I am a programmer, but more than a "computer scientist", I've associated myself with being a "go player". With AlphaGo's breakthrough, the game of go feels to have become a subset of "computer science", rather than an orthogonal endeavor. If I want to get closer to solving go, it would be better to pursue a computer solution, rather than studying go.
I used to feel "unique" or "special" in some ways. I had a unique interest in a game that not many people knew about or were good at. I had special knowledge of how the game worked. It made me, personally, feel special.
But in March, that "special" part of me died. The knowledge I've been pursuing through go no longer feels unique or special. It's just some extensive study I've done on one of the many problems that computers have solved. It makes what I've been studying feel less special and less significant. It makes go seem
ordinary.
It's not just with go. Another "special" part of me has been my study of language. I thought it was neat to know Korean and Japanese when many of my peers didn't. It gave me some sort of pride. But I read the other day that in a matter of years, foreign languages won't be an issue. Computer translation will have advanced such that people could carry microphones to do live translation. When that day comes, my Korean and Japanese abilities will not be special. They will not be unique. They will just be some obscure hobby I spent my time on, which doesn't really matter, since computers can do it better anyway.
Advancement in technology continues to make our lives easier. But as computers solve problems and make the world an easier place to live, it makes me personally feel less and less significant...
And perhaps, reminds me of my mortality, which computers do not share.
Alpha GO did win and rather convincingly. But did it enjoy the game? Could it say after the third game; "I am sorry Lee you have lost the match, and are not a challenge I wish to do something else with my time."
Did it know fear in the fourth game? Could it show awe at some moves the way the professional commentators did of the best of Lees and Alpha's moves? Will it share its memories of the match? Ultimately it is just a sophisticated calculator. Of course these "calculators" are more and more capable and are going to run most things in the near future.... Yes Lee showed he was a true champion, who fought to the end against nigh impossible odds. My Hat is off to him.
Does it matter?
Re: Did AlphaGo help spread the popularity of the game?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:26 am
by Sneegurd
Go community goes through the same reactions as Chess community in the 90s. "It is just a calculator". It's a psychological thing and does indeed not matter. Technically. Computers will win all Go games against humans one day. So what. Changes happen.
Re: Did AlphaGo help spread the popularity of the game?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:50 am
by cyclops
I hope to see a program soon that given a ruleset computes the value B ( or W ) at least gets from any position (P) if he starts and plays optimal. We will have Val(P,B) = max(- Val(P+,W)) where we run over all positions P+ produced from P by a legal black move. It seems it takes far less time to write such program than to have it finished.