OT: Chess - Page 2

GFSnl · #1 December 2nd, 2011, 04:18 PM

I don't think a human is able to consistently outplay a computer anymore. Even with randomized openings.

Computers are notably weaker in closed positions. But even great chess players with an affinity for closed positions, like Kramnik, got their *** handed to them a couple of years ago.

Computers continue to double processing power every 2 years or so.
And with endgame tables now almost up to 8 pieces I'd say computers have soundly beaten the carbon based life forms on this planet

.

WraithLord · #2 December 2nd, 2011, 04:23 PM

Yes, but are the AI having fun?

Seriously, chess is a game and for normal human beings (& animals) games are a way to have fun while improving some skills. For AI, it's all just number crunching.

GFSnl · #3 December 2nd, 2011, 04:28 PM

Your right of course.

Wish we had such A.I. available to sup in MP or to play against in SP in Dom 3

.

Knai · #4 December 5th, 2011, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WraithLord

Yes, but are the AI having fun?

Seriously, chess is a game and for normal human beings (& animals) games are a way to have fun while improving some skills. For AI, it's all just number crunching.

Given that the AI isn't actually sentient, it can't have fun. That's like asking if your calculator has fun when you punch numbers in it, it's a tool, not a being. Large scale automated production facilities don't have fun either, it still makes them better at what they do than assembly line workers.

krpeters · #5 December 4th, 2011, 08:24 PM

...on the grand scales of things, unless you're really good, I would guess they wouldn't get "brutalized", they'd do well enough after the first few moves.[/quote]

I had in mind against expert humans. You're right that against ordinary players they'd do well enough, although I do think they would have trouble initially.

Scaramuccia · #6 December 4th, 2011, 12:49 PM

I think AI had fun analysing my game. I was playing French as black and done a stupid error allowing white 4 turn attack to take a queen. Both me and opponent missed this variation. Analyse looked like (computer suggestions to each player turn, by turn):
1)Bxg6 and white owns.
2)Defend against Bxg6 or you will be owned.
3)Bxg6 and you own, moron.
4)Idiot defend.
5)Bxg6, Bxg6.
6)Hey you have great chances but you must defend against Bxg6.
7)Now it is 3-turn combo maybe you will see it??
8)Or maybe you?
9)3 turn queen win, don't you forget it?
10)Ok I stop following this game. White ended this option by himself.

Scaramuccia · #7 December 5th, 2011, 02:42 PM

Large systems (automated production line, big computer program) are not far from beings.
It is easy for factory(or car) to be in bad mood. Why they couldn't have fun?

WraithLord · #8 December 5th, 2011, 04:42 PM

Knai, I wasn't saying they aren't better at chess. They are, but you miss the point. chess is a game and you play it in order to have fun. Imagine you could auto win every chess game for some moderate effort (not playing - just calculating and querying tables) would you enjoy "playing" like this?

Scaramuccia, perhaps that day will come. It will then be clear that we have created a better race than we are

Scaramuccia · #9 December 6th, 2011, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WraithLord

Scaramuccia, perhaps that day will come. It will then be clear that we have created a better race than we are

We've done it. Books (or texts in general) are better race than we are.

Knai · #10 December 6th, 2011, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WraithLord

Knai, I wasn't saying they aren't better at chess. They are, but you miss the point. chess is a game and you play it in order to have fun. Imagine you could auto win every chess game for some moderate effort (not playing - just calculating and querying tables) would you enjoy "playing" like this?

I probably would. However, the point is that fun is an alien and completely irrelevant concept to a tool. It doesn't have thoughts, or emotions, or anything like that, and as such doesn't matter.