Is a computer an athlete? How long until computers start competing

>>76143380
Probably could soon at most american (e.g. nascar, bore ball) and olympic sports. Basically any sport with very specific and rather simple requirements on the athlete. That will never make a computer an athlete though.

>>76143380
How would AI driven cars ever overtake each other

>>76143932
a computer could theoretically excel in motorsports because pathfinding algorithms could be optimized to manage the physical constraints put on both the car and the "driver", but the carryover to baseball isn't so clear.

>>76143991
valid point, my above response was assuming an AI-controlled car would be racing against other drivers. if we're talking AI vs. AI, that's an entirely different story.

>>76143380
>http://roborace.com/
eventually

>>76143380
>Will Google's self driving cars compete
They're actually considering getting out of the business because there are too many serious competitors. I'd bet on Mercedes or Tesla or Volvo...or Rernault or Audi.

>>76144075
getting out of what business? automated cars? if so, i'm genuinely interested in seeing a source. if you mean autosports cars, is google even moving in that direction in the first place?

>>76144018
baseball essentially needs superhuman reaction to a strike a fast moving ball perfectly. Surely a robot could easily be much better at it than a human, if the effort was ever made to create one. If he hits homeruns, he can take as long as he likes to go round the bases.

Superfast and accurate pitching could also be achieved by a similarly specifically designed robot.

A fast moving catcher robot, could also be made but the pitcher robot would already make him unnecessary.

Since boreball really requires nothing else, the robots could absolutely dominate this sport.

Similarly footbrawl, with its constant breaks, unlimited substitutions and very compartmentalised skill requirements (one player can take all throws, one make all runs and catches, one takes all kicks, etc.) is perfectly possible to be played by robots (better than humans ever could), possibly even today, if anyone were to make the effort and hefty investment to create such a robot.

>>76144099
i'm not so sure. elite baseball pitchers do their best to conceal what type of pitch they are throwing. ostensibly, a computer could both read the pitch more accurately and make the pitch more unpredictably. in that case, who wins? it doesn't seem clear to me.

adding american football to the argument makes things difficult because of play calls and audibles. i guess that ultimately, this discussion comes down to what physically possible endowments you're going to give to each of these machines. it's easier to abstract in the case of, e.g., motorsports, which is why i think it would be more easily solved.

>>76144099
>Since boreball really requires nothing else, the robots could absolutely dominate this sport.

What if you man marked every single "robot"?

>>76144150
I thought we were just discussing if they could be better than humans (as in your pic related).

So robot hitter would need to read flight pattern of pitch, adjust bat and carry out a hit (ideally homeruns so he doesnt need to run), since superfast measurement and processing speed are already available, only the motors adjusting the bat swing fast enough would maybe be an issue, but I doubt it, assuming money was no issue in building it. Power would also not be a limitation. Since the speed to measure and respond could be so fast, it would probably sufficient to react while ball is in flight, the concealing and disguising of pitches shouldnt make a difference.

Some in am. foot., if money is no issue it could of course understand calls and audibles, also why shouldn't the coach program it via wifi.

>>76144171
boreball = baseball, there is no man marking.