Man vs Computer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kudistos Megistos
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kudistos Megistos

Guest
I'm currently watching Watson play Jeopardy; he's doing well. This is a pretty big event in the history of AI.

EDIT:

He's currently tied with one of the greatest players around; he started off very strongly but lost his lead in the second half.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't bet on it.  IBM cheated Kasparov out of that chess game with behind the scenes intimidation and the way they pretended it was for science when really it was a big ego profit booster.  They refused a rematch, and kasparov destroyed Deep Blue in game 2.  Computers are still number crunchers, which is why they perform so badly at Go.
 
I wouldn't bet on it.  IBM cheated Kasparov out of that chess game with behind the scenes intimidation and the way they pretended it was for science when really it was a big ego profit booster.  They refused a rematch, and kasparov destroyed Deep Blue in game 2.  Computers are still number crunchers, which is why they perform so badly at Go.
Click to expand...
Fufu!

Computers may be number crunchers, but so are we. We just do it in a very different way and have a completely different set of pre-installed software.
 
I wouldn't bet on it.  IBM cheated Kasparov out of that chess game with behind the scenes intimidation and the way they pretended it was for science when really it was a big ego profit booster.  They refused a rematch, and kasparov destroyed Deep Blue in game 2.  Computers are still number crunchers, which is why they perform so badly at Go.
Click to expand...
They have a computer program that plays Go at dan levels now, it gives some low level professionals a run for their money. Haha.
Or so I am told. I saw the program in action, but it was only playing a mid level kyu.
 
Round two was on tonight and
Hory sheet! Humanity just got pwnt!
 
Computers may be number crunchers, but so are we. We just do it in a very different way and have a completely different set of pre-installed software.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. There's a big difference between high-speed, granular bitwise actions and low-speed concatenations of neuron networks. Likewise, I'm not sure if iterating over a well-profiled recursion tree really qualifies as 'a kind of thinking'.
 
Last edited:
Computers may be number crunchers, but so are we. We just do it in a very different way and have a completely different set of pre-installed software.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. There's a big difference between high-speed, granular bitwise actions and low-speed concatenations of neuron networks. Likewise, I'm not sure if iterating over a well-profiled recursion tree really qualifies as 'a kind of thinking'.
Click to expand...
Hey, I was casting my net out widely in order to make a point :P

The point being that human thought isn't something special or magical that computers could never equal.
 
When your enemy has no arms or legs?
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. Situations where your enemy has no arms or legs but you still have to kill him with a huge sword are very common in combat. I can see why people would make swords specifically for these occasions.
Click to expand...
Won't be long before Watson and his buddies make us wish we had focused more on huge sword production.
 
When your enemy has no arms or legs?
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. Situations where your enemy has no arms or legs but you still have to kill him with a huge sword are very common in combat. I can see why people would make swords specifically for these occasions.
Click to expand...
Won't be long before Watson and his buddies make us wish we had focused more on huge sword production.
Click to expand...
1296110908520.png


Sorry just wanted an excuse to use that image  ;D

Anyway if you think about what a CPU is, it's essentially a giant serial processor.  It tackles one task at a time.  The incredible thing about the brain is that it's an incredibly efficient parallel processor.  There is no "core" or set of "cores".  It's billions and billions of neurons (for all intents and purposes: NOMFET memristors) that connect are arranged in a dynamic architecture.  Some parts of the brain are designated tasks but if you were to damage your auditory cortex the brain would designate that task to another part.  The best part is that the cortexes (? corteces??) share information.  So if your brain is doing a task of processing music you might have your auditory cortex taking apart that stream of information while sending it to the cerebellum that remembers parts of it which sends that to the auditory cortext to make corrections and this happens hundreds of times a second across many cortexes every waking second of the day.  CPUs are simply too serial in nature to mimic this today.  The world's best parallel processors are huge and in turn run into logistical issues of latency and software/hardware design.

It's incredible, but it's not unsolvable.  That's why I praise IBM for this publicity stunt.  Yeah it's exaggerated, sure it's not real intelligence, but it's a leap forward that wouldn't have been there if they hadn't invested into this.  Watson develops basic patterns.  Not high level patterns, not with 100% accuracy, but it's a start.  You mimic one part of human intelligence then expand on it.  It might seem crazy but looking on the past 50 years of logic design and IC advancement I'd say we might be seeing REAL AI by 2061.
 
Looks like we're one step closer to Skynet.
Click to expand...
negative side: robots kill us

plus side: we get to think of vista while we're shooting at machines
 
Looks like we're one step closer to Skynet.
Click to expand...
negative side: robots kill us

plus side: we get to think of vista while we're shooting at machines
Click to expand...
If the robots run on Vista, we're in no trouble at all.
Click to expand...
Of course we are! They will constantly crash and who will have to pay for repairs? WE will have to pay. This is gay, really.
 
I meant kasparov game 1 (match 2).  Not game 2.

Also, we are nowhere near skynet, which was a self aware computer.  This is no neural net, it is just a number cruncher.
 
Looks like we're one step closer to Skynet.
Click to expand...
negative side: robots kill us

plus side: we get to think of vista while we're shooting at machines
Click to expand...
If the robots run on Vista, we're in no trouble at all.
Click to expand...
Of course we are! They will constantly crash and who will have to pay for repairs? WE will have to pay. This is gay, really.
Click to expand...
...Or we just... you know... don't repair them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top