Re: [Computer-go] Updating Asimovs Laws of Robotics
From: Thomas RohdeOn 2017-11-01 at 11:48, adrian.b.rob...@gmail.com wrote: Robert Jasiek writes: In Germany, an ethics commission has written ethical guidelines for self-driving cars with also the rule to always prefer avoiding casualties of human beings. Did they consult Isaac Asimov on this? Should actually have been their first thought, IMO (and I guess they were), Asimov’s Laws of Robotics should be obligatory reading for everybody in robotics. (and probably should be expanded/modernised — adapted to contemporary knowledge) Jokes aside, it's interesting to see some convergence of science to science fiction.. Not surprising, IMO, since many of the best SF writers, including Asimov, actually were and are scientists and/or engineers. And scientists (as well as engineers, even industrial designers) often take their ideas from SF, again unsurprising … I’d assume that reading SF has inspired many people to pursue science, engineering, astronautics, etc. Also, there is the word “science” in Science Fiction, which should tell us something. SF is not necessarily always “space opera” with goodies and baddies and alien monsters, space opera is often not much more than cowboy stories in “spacey” apparel. Forgive the off-topic … as an avid SF reader I was triggered ;-) Respectfully, Tom If you're interested in this, check out one of the key results of the 2017 Asilomar conference on AI: https://futureoflife.org/ai-principles/ Cheers, -- Mark ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
Re: [Computer-go] AI Driving Cars
Perhaps you did not hear about the fatal Tesla crash in Florida on 05/07/16? http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/07/01/business/inside-tesla-accident.html Or the fatal crash in China of a Tesla on 01/16/16, which only got reported in the news around September? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/business/fatal-tesla-crash-in-china-involved-autopilot-government-tv-says.html Frankly, there has not been a lot of coverage of these 2 events. -- Mark | Message: 6 | Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 21:34:27 + | From: Nick Wedd| To:computer-go@computer-go.org | Subject: Re: [Computer-go] Our Silicon Overlord | Message-ID: | | Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" | | 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 ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed at last (John Tromp)
Well, although Dr. Tromp seems rather modest about this result, I haven't heard of anyone else doing similarly interesting work on the theoretical foundations of the game. This set of results is fascinating and newsworthy. Congratulations on carrying this out, all the way up to 19x19 ! I have a couple of questions, if these comments are being seen by Dr. Tromp. 1. So, as you go up the chart, what is the percentage of all possible positions that are legal? Isn't that a trivially-quick corollary from your results? [ (Tromp result) / (3 **(n*n)) ] And isn't that an interesting sequence? Perhaps more intuitively useful to a go-programmer than the raw numbers themselves? Does this set of ratios make any intuitive sense to you ... or should I rephrase that as -- can you rationalize these results of the ratios? 2. One of the most frustrating things about writing a program to play go is that the rules are a bit blurry. Far too blurry to really satisfy a computer programmer. I think some of the work you've done over the years is in creating a rigorous and computable set of rules. Is this correct, or have I heard wrong on this count? Do you have a set of rules that could be profitably used for the basis of a go-playing program, that you like today? Is there a link to such a rule set somewhere? Thanks, -- Mark Goldfain ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go