Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

If you are killed by an AI-driven car, the manufacturer will use the case to improve the algorithm and make sure that this type of death never happens again. Unfortunately a death by a drunk driver doesn't seem to teach anyone anything and will keep happening as long as people need to drive and

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

It already happened https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/30/tesla-autopilot-death-self-driving-car-elon-musk Le 07/01/2017 à 22:34, Nick Wedd a écrit : > The first time someone's killed by an AI-controlled vehicle, you can > be sure it'll be world news. That's how journalism works. >

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

All the point, is that there is very little chance that you are more likely to dead by an AI driven than a human driven as the expectation set to AI driven is at least one order of magnitude higher than human one before there is any hope that AI would be authorized (Actually the real expectation

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

Well, I don't know what is the likelihood of being hit by drunk drivers or AI driven cars, but if it were the same I'd prefer to have drunk drivers. Drunk drivers you can understand: you can improve your chances by making yourself more visible, do not jump from beyond obstacles, be more careful

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

The first time someone's killed by an AI-controlled vehicle, you can be sure it'll be world news. That's how journalism works. Nick On 7 January 2017 at 21:24, Xavier Combelle wrote: > > > ...this is a major objective. E.g., we do not want AI driven cars > > working

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

Yes, standards are high for AI systems … but we digress Cheers, David G Doshay ddos...@mac.com > On 7, Jan 2017, at 1:24 PM, Xavier Combelle wrote: > > >> ...this is a major objective. E.g., we do not want AI driven cars >> working right most of the time but

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

> ...this is a major objective. E.g., we do not want AI driven cars > working right most of the time but sometimes killing people because > the AI faces situations (such as a local sand storm or a painting on > the street with a fake landscape or fake human being) outside its > current training

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

On 07.01.2017 16:33, Jim O'Flaherty wrote: I hope you get access to AlphaGo ASAP. More realistically, I (we) would need to translate the maths into algorithmic strategy then executed by a program module representing the human opponent. Such is necessary because no human can remember

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

I love your dedication to the principles of logic. I'm looking forward to hearing and seeing how your explorations in this area pan out. They will be valuable to everyone interested in exploring AI weaknesses. I hope you get access to AlphaGo ASAP. On Jan 6, 2017 11:28 PM, "Robert Jasiek"

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

On 06.01.2017 23:37, Jim O'Flaherty wrote: into a position with superko [...] how do you even get AlphaGo into a the arcane state in the first place, I can't in practice. I have not provided a way to beat AlphaGo from the game start at the empty board. All I have shown is that there are

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

Okay. So I will play along. How do you think you would coax AlphaGo into a position with superko without AlphaGo having already simulated that pathway as a less probable win space for itself when compared to other playing trees which avoid it? IOW, how do you even get AlphaGo into a the arcane

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

On 05.01.2017 17:32, Jim O'Flaherty wrote: I don't follow. 1) "For each arcane position reached, there would now be ample data for AlphaGo to train on that particular pathway." is false. See below. 2) "two strategies. The first would be to avoid the state in the first place." Does AlphaGo

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

For each arcane position reached, there would now be ample data for AlphaGo to train on that particular pathway. And it would emerge two strategies. The first would be to avoid the state in the first place. And the second would be to optimize play in that particular state. So, the human advantage

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

Le 05/01/2017 à 07:37, Robert Jasiek a écrit : > On 04.01.2017 22:08, "Ingo Althöfer" wrote: >> humanity's last hope > > The "last hope" are theoreticians creating arcane positions far > outside the NN of AlphaGo so that its deep reading would be > insufficient compensation! Another chance is

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

On 04.01.2017 22:08, "Ingo Althöfer" wrote: humanity's last hope The "last hope" are theoreticians creating arcane positions far outside the NN of AlphaGo so that its deep reading would be insufficient compensation! Another chance is long-term, subtle creation and use of aji. -- robert

Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord

I think it was mentioned that Master was playing all of its moves in almost exactly 5-second increments, even trivial forcing move responses, which was one of the things that led people to believe it was an AI. If that's true, AlphaGo was basically playing under a time-handicap. On Wed, Jan 4,