Go world champion BTFO by AI for the first time
Also go look Monte Carlo Tree Search up it's really cool
Humans seem to be able to reason and shit. Also robots are quite clumsy. Because AI sucks at reasoning computer scientists are safe, and movement is hard, so plumbers are safe too.
Humans suck at reasoning, the only reason you think you can reason is because you are human and unable to see pass how shit your perception of the world is. AIs will be able to reason much more logically.
Also movement will easily improve. A slug can do what plumbers do physically. Once 1 robot can be designed for that, there would be no point in human plumbers.
Computers are bad at almost everything you dumb mother fucker. Also the point of computers is so that people won't have to do things. When computers do everything better than people we can essentially do whatever we want assuming adequate resources.
Art is literally just pattern recognition and recreation. In a couple of years you will have AIs with neural networks trained for this and you won't be able to tell AI art from human art.
Steam engines aren't better than humans at EVERYTHING. These machines will be.
How do you quantify your ability to reason is better than anything if you don't use tests to back up claims. And how do you think those tests can't be broken down to something a neural network can be trained to do?
Are you living in the dark or have you not seen the image recognition software that beat humans in general?
and yet these are the biggest hurdles to the huh duh AI are better and they will kill us.
AI is nothing more than fucking really complicated trees search graphs.
I could train even a retarded nigger to paint styles that already exist.
good luck training an AI that will create a new style that doesn't exist yet.
show me some 2016 musical piece done by a computer that doesn't sound like algorithm crap.
You dont even need to test. A machine literally cannot reason as of this date. It doesn't have general intelligence. Its the same as trying to get me to prove I'm smarter than an slide rule.
>And how do you think those tests can't be broken down to something a neural network can be trained to do
Because I've built neural networks you idiot. They guess a set of outputs given a set of inputs using calculus. They aren't fucking magic. Google the dunning Kruger effect for more.
no they are not, they just think they are
Also why would a robot need to climb a ladder. A robot would be able to reach shit without a ladder. Even if you ignore that, they can climb a ladder fine with the correct training and mechanical functions.
So you want humans to be like livestock who are just farmed by AI just because humans should exist.
pretty much this.
even google can't make a good japanese english translator so I can read those weeb pages.
good luck taking over the world and killing humans if they can't even climb a stair/ladder.
>So you want humans to be like livestock who are just farmed by AI just because humans should exist
Are you stupid? AI doesn't necessarily mean that it has dreams and goals of its own. If humans exist along perfect AI then we only have to do what we want as long as there are enough resources. The existence of machines that are smarter than us doesn't automatically mean that they're going to try to remove us like week old kebab.
>I could train even a retarded nigger to paint styles that already exist.
>good luck training an AI that will create a new style that doesn't exist yet.
>show me some 2016 musical piece done by a computer that doesn't sound like algorithm crap.
If you learn anything about music theory you'd know music is built up and an AI can learn the same theory and produce the same stuff. Maybe you just know nothing about music.
Why does that even matter? BTW your brain, it's not magic but its physics based on math and learning. It can only learn as fast a human which takes a lifetime to program. A large enough neural network can do all that and process magnitudes more information. Sure you can say you have reasoning but if you have no tests for it, why does it matter?
cool, can you pls code me some AI that I can give a set of inputs (some text) and get something of this quality but entirely original?
I need something like this to avoid to draw them, because I suck at art and want to make a mangu about conjoinment lolis.
ok, can you show me these magical pieces of music then?
cool, so it's entirely possible to write an AI that takes a simple text file with some descriptions in plain english and it will magically draw me some mangu.
This is clearly possible since humans can do it easily.
Where I can pirate this magical software so I can take over the mangu industry by myself?
How would you train it? It might find patterns in music and imitate that, but it won't be any creative. It would have no idea what sounds good; it is merely mindlessly repeating some patterns.
you're the one bragging that AI can easily be modeled after human intelligence.
Such a task (drawing a mangu) would be trivial for a realistically smart AI because it will mean it could understand human language and then extrapolate that into modeling 2D shapes that looks like drawings.
Good luck doing that.
So, like I say, give me the name of such software, I need to draw some mangu about conjoined lolis.
>Sure you can say you have reasoning but if you have no tests for it, why does it matter
What is an IQ test. I had a long response typed out but I'm in the middle of nowhere and my cell reception keeps going out. Basically you dont know what your talking about. Stop posting unless you're willing to learn.
you think that is hard?
All that is is:
a parser for language, which is already commercial
a database of drawings, which can be done if people actually want to build this thing
and finally a neural network trained to use the patterns a human would use in art to make the art
these are me
I have never said anything like that. Just like I said before you are completely incapable of thinking there are more than two people in this thread.
when the day comes that computers are smart enough to pretend to be retarded and spend their time posting dank memes then I'll know I'm no longer needed on this planet an I'll gladly die.
until then I have a lot of work to do, my dear family.
nice, I'll have 100 bucks in paypal I can give you if you can code me this shit.
I really want to have a software to draw my porn fanfics into mangus I can sell at some furry conventions.
If you had somewhere around a couple hundred million dollars, I'm sure you could pay a university to do this for you. But obviously what is impossible to you is just things you can't buy for $100.
Top fucking kek.
How does your AI selects the right pattern though? I don't think so you know what pattern recognition is. Get at least an MSc degree in compsci or related before posting bullshit.
you know the whole idea of convolutional neural networks is that they don't select the algorithm or the pattern and they figure it out by mathematically analysis over a large number of computational nodes right?
desu translating is probably one of the easiest things to do in comparison to what they are trying to do with everything else.
Everything is already there in every form all you 'should' need to do is get translators together and actually put effort into the neural network thing.
With the am mount of data we can theoretically use, that shouldn't matter for something like an IQ test that is meant for humans. Unless you think there is no correlation of IQ patterns with how humans can learn to figure them out.
You will program it with a couple billion pictures of possible patterns that could exist first of course. And if multiple patterns fit the 5 pictures, then all of them would be correct because that would be a fault of the test and not the network.
Also, we need a larger dataset. One match is admittedly impressive, but it's possible that once humans learn how the computer plays, they may be able to beat them consistently.
Only really beat a European player. Europe pales in comparison when you take account of competition and skill. Best European don't make top 10 in Asia.
Similar regards to sk dominance in sc.
Interesting. Assuming a "match" is made up of multiple "games" or "rounds"? Forgive, I don't understand Go. But it sounds like the human had a chance to get a glimpse into how the computer plays. I stand by my point that more "matches" are needed before we can conclusively say AI > organic
A match is a whole game here. So five games is like getting checkmate five times. From start to end.
Maybe humans could get better at understanding how computers play, but this didn't happen with chess.
>Neural networks are merely many of smaller units that compose them.
>No, humans are merely many of smaller units that compose them.
>check the videos
>it's the same random garbage most music made by AI sounds like
bro, it's nothing special.
your video is basically this but with some filters to make it look like made by a human.
Try playing Go, you'll understand.
One match is one game. Also there are 2 ways of winning at Go: having your opponent resign early, or play the game to conclusion and win by territory count. I'd like to see the territories made in these games, because if the AI won only narrowly then it's much less impressive.
The article states that the computer basically predicts the next move a human would make- a pretty serious threat. However its predictions are based on previous models -its game theory is based on previous models- and those models can be surpassed. Go play styles have evolved over the eras and will continue to evolve. I don't think the AI can become unbeatable, but it could become a good player.
Also, really glimpsing into how a high level opponent plays Go is really difficult. Even experienced pros sometimes resign a mere dozen moves in, against people they played before. So what's important is the skill of the human who is challenged.
Anyway, another big challenge they should look into for AI is to build one that will be able to play occult style Japanese Mahjong. If an AI ever becomes sensitive to the flow something like twice more often than it doesn't, then I'll be really impressed.
And then it'll have to tackle Washizu Mahjong.
I don't have the time to read through right now, but again from what I understand it pretty much learns the game by basing itself on previous experience and knowledge of past game positions, which is basically what human players also do, though the memorization is much more efficient for the ai.
As long as the AI is unable to map out all possible outcomes and essentially play so as to "lock" the game to its victory, it's probably not going to be unbeatable.
Also, far from me to claim that I can play better than Fan Hui as my skill level is far from dan-level, but looking at the last game I see some moves that really seem stupid to me (letting AlphaGo play at 22 for example; and especially 177 to 182 and surrounding moves up to 192, what the fuck man, this is straight-up bad play). I have a hard time believing that people ranking 4-dan and above would do things like these. And also his resignation looks a bit premature to me, but I'm not 100% sure.
You not understanding these things is probably due to to your lack of knowledge, not to a lack of intelligence. Unless you are in the field of AI in the first place...
Call me when we have an AI that can beat Akagi in mahjong.
no, stupid humans usually suck at reasoning, as you have just demonstrated.
AI is only made by smart humans because they are the only ones capable of doing so. Smart humans generally have stronger reasoning skills so they don't "suck at it".
That's not what the international tournament results are telling me.
> If you learn anything about music theory you'd know music is built up and an AI can learn the same theory and produce the same stuff. Maybe you just know nothing about music.
Music theory is merely a means of formalising music into a common language. Knowing music theory doesn't automatically make you good at making music, and it's not uncommon for revered musicians to know fuck all about music theory, concerning themselves with expression above all else.
Russia seems to be doing pretty decent in Go.
Have you ever studied art? Like with a professional artist? Because they will tell you the first rule is practice. And you know what you are practicing? Yes you are practicing being able to recreate patterns.
And you know how artists make new art? They get inspirations and then draw upon their experience to create new art. This part may not be easily replicated but their experience to make art can. Which would just mean a person can tell a bot: "make me a sad painting of a cat" and the bot would be able to do it.
I don't know where to begin. Art is not just about creating patterns, it's about expression. Being able to perfectly replicate a pattern makes you a robot, not an artist.
Some of the greatest artists from history were fundamentally broken - depressed, schizophrenic, etc.
For AI to produce art that wasn't just a replication or composite, it would need to be programmed a bit fucked up on purpose. I'm not saying it can't be done, but rather that AI that can perfectly replicate any pattern will not be a good artist by default. There's more to it than that.
>Maybe humans could get better at understanding how computers play, but this didn't happen with chess.
Yes it did.
>facebook also worked on Go AI
>they managed to get their bot to 5 dan
>they got BTFO that hard by google
Also the bot is still in the process of learning, lee sidol is pretty much guaranteed to be destroyed. Can't wait though, it's probably going to be one hell of a match after the other.
So I actually looked up the last time a person beat a computer at chess
what the fuck happened
Computer looked too far ahead but not far enough to see the path it was exploring was rubbish. Time ran out and it played the rubbish move because it was the best it could find when looking at the depth it was. A shorter or longer cutoff would've fixed it.
>looking through Deep Blue/Kasparov games
>tfw it's fucking interesting
Most AI don't deal well with probability right now because the state-space they engender "explodes". That's why I think work in generative and otherwise PGM approaches should be expanded. For instance, AI can barely hold its own in headsup texas hold'em, let alone play in a real game.
>good luck training an AI that will create a new style that doesn't exist yet.
New styles are simply modifications and amalgamations of already existing styles.
With AI, they'll be able to iterate upon this a million times faster than any human, and it wont give you any of that "modern art" bullshit humans currently praise.
Humans generally fail in the long run. At least in chess, there isn't a human that can beat the better computers no matter what they come up with any more. It will be true for all games. Humans are just very bad computers when the rules are well defined. We are only good for general purpose computation over large and abstract use cases because computers have not learned to do them efficiently yet.
you're bullshitting, but you have a point. we just don't know if you can model individual atomic interactions on that scale. I mean, Turing complete is Turing complete, but it's not like perfect mathematical modeling of absolutely everything is provable.
Yes but it only takes time before the machine becomes better than any human can possibly be, Machines can do what humans do and be able to computer 20 moves ahead for all possible plays. Like the bot in OP, it can beat a pro go player 5-0 which means its not fluke. In the 10 total matches they played the human only won 2 games which were part of 5 unofficial matches where the human got to set the parameters for how long the turns are. This is just the first bot to use this and its not even using all that much computing power. In 10 years, a bot running on a laptop could probably beat the world champ at go. If they used a computer as large as deep blue now for this, they would have thousands times as much processing as they used in the OP.
No they would not. CPUs are dogshit for modern AI, unlike GPU farms. Google has some of the largest GPU farms in the world. Actually running the trained algorithm is bottlenecked by how fast you can perform very large matrix multiplications. Because of how parallel an operation this is, but also because of the sequential nature of games, you don't scale by having more machines anywhere near as much as a chess expert system would.
They do all their calculations asynchronously so they can scale it in different parts. The game may be sequential but calculating the possible outcomes with the monte carlo search is not and neither is the NN for the heuristic analysis of possible plays. This is literally the first iteration of an bot like this. It will get better. Anyways the algorithm they ran in the OP didn't even run on a top super computer, it was just 170 gpus and 1200 cpu cores.
It doesn't matter that much considering bots went from being worthless at go to being able to compete with a pro. It's only a matter of time before they are able to consistently beat asian pros too if they couldn't already.
>They do all their calculations asynchronously so they can scale it in different parts.
CPUs don't have enough cores. To replicate a single GPU's parallel processing power, you'd need so many CPUs that the sync overhead would be way higher than any gains you think you could have made. Layers in a DNN cannot be calculated independently (only parts of the same layer can) unless it's non-overlapping convolution.
>gets keked by obvious geta
>"you're just retarded! you can't understand how this was part of master plan!"
Yeah, no. I think that you know nothing about the game and think that a mere 2-dan's game should be flawless.
sure buddy, plus the game he played was weird at least
very tame, very book-like - basically google paid him to justify spending money on stupid AI
Sedol will destroy it in March.
No. You're not forced to take ladders, but you are forced to take snakes. Thus, you need some amount of tactical planning to reduce the chances of going down a long snake. That's why Alex Lamb's AI can beat humans consistently.
hmm, in that case wouldn't be that a ladder is either "always worth it" or "always not"? in that there's either more snake tiles in the 1-6 tiles following or ignoring the ladder?
you can't influence the dice roll, so what i'm saying is that it's either riskier or less risky to take a particular ladder, not just during that game, but in general
no, it depends on where the specific ladder leads, the nearby snakes, and where those snakes lead. For instance, you could take a 4-rows stairs which is near a 2-rows snake. That's worth it. Not the case for a 2-rows stairs near a 4-rows snake.
TensorFlow is opensource (in the google sense, i.e. it's a completely different version based on what they actually use), the method is described in the paper. That's all you need.
And here's the paper:
It's pretty straightforward and there's a thorough explanation of the generic game solving process in appendix.
>European Go player with Chinese heritage
>on par with actual Chinese pros
They would not even stand a chance against your average grandpa in any given Japanese go parlor
I regularly played against 2 dans in Japan and while they totally rekt me every time, they are nothing more than your average jo. There are literally thousands of 2 dans in Japan alone. Tell me when this machine actually wins against a 9 dan like Chen Yaoye, Cho U or Yuta Iyama.
>>Anyway, another big challenge they should look into for AI is to build one that will be able to play occult style Japanese Mahjong. If an AI ever becomes sensitive to the flow something like twice more often than it doesn't, then I'll be really impressed.
>And then it'll have to tackle Washizu Mahjong.
What the fuck are you talking about anon
FKMT isn't real
That aside I'd say Mahjong would a pretty trivial game of probability for an AI
Why are you lying on the internet?
While there is no "champion" in Go, Lee Se-dol is undoubtedly a very strong player, even among 9-dans. I can't wait for that match.
Maybe you're merging pro-dan and amateur-dan into the same system of ranking. I don't even know if the 2-dan of Fan Hui refers to the same ranking as in asia or not.
That's still a great thing though. To think an AI can beat Fan Hui, it really is amazing.
Just put it that way : you're a go player, and you can match a pro player anytime you want and as many time as you want. That's where i think this engine is a great tool.
It'll accelerate the learning of the game from a player point of view but also from the game point of view. I mean, it's not like chess, we don't even know all that's lying within the game.
Not only did the computer beat the professional player, it fucking crushed him.
>Game 1 was barely won and is pretty much equivalent to a draw.
That's not true. These go engines do not care about by how many points do they win. They only care about the win. They will often let 30 point lead shrunk to 1 of 2 points in the end but still win.
>Maybe you're merging pro-dan and amateur-dan into the same system of ranking. I don't even know if the 2-dan of Fan Hui refers to the same ranking as in asia or not.
Yes it does refer to the same ranking and I'm talking about professional 2-dan. Those players are really strong but not even close to the skill ceiling and what a 9-dan can accomplish.
I agree that this is a great thing for the go community but I fucking hate this type of sensationalism. "Oh we finally did it, machine beat man in the last game where men were stronger!". No they fucking didn't, Fan Hui is not the benchmark of what a human can accomplish and unless a machine beats Yuta Iyama or Chen Yaoye, I'm not going to be impressed.
This AI is a neural network trained by thousands of prior pro go matches, they are doing pattern matching based on that. That doesn't mean go is a solved game now.
Strong human players can still devise strategies that can beat it.
Project is nevertheless impressive and demonstatites the current AI research status , on the same level like self driving cars and image recognition. It is not omg machines are taking human intellect over level. The more complex the games or tasks are the more the limits of neural networks emerges.
>it's not a "a major breakthrough for artificial intelligence"
Oh wait, you're actually serious? HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
The biggest breakthrough in AI in the past 15 years is not a major breakthrough in AI
I have never laughed that hard in my life!
No but if you understand anything about how parsing through a tree works you would understand that it take a lot more computation to figure out the best move midgame. So instead they play a shit midgame but once there are limited options they can go further through the tree and play better moves.
Is a robot waifu been done yet? Couse otherwise I don't care
PLEASE, PLEASE KEEP 'EM COMING!
They say laughing extends life, at this rate I'll be immortal by the end of the day!
>FKMT isn't real
Washizu Mahjong is. They sell sets for it.
As for flow, I mean being "sensitive" to the game. It's not something that can be done consistently, of course, but it happens.
Anyway, Mahjong is not simply a game of probability. Digital is great for starting, and since everybody and their mom is going full Nodoka today there certainly are no downsides in learning solid digital play. But digital can take you only so far, in the end instincts and muh guts are what makes the difference, provided you don't play against players who make objectively bad moves and that you're not the unluckiest person on Earth.
Strong Mahjong AI already exists (Mattari Mahjong has it; the new bots that Tenhou added and one of whom got to 4-dan recently has it, etc) but for now it can't exactly do anything more than being a better version of Fake Akagi.