Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 11:20:08 03/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 2001 at 12:56:58, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>On March 14, 2001 at 05:25:37, Andrew Dados wrote:
>
>>I doubt chess domain is wide enough for 'generalization' here. If a program
>>could learn Thai chess in 5 min as all chess-playing humans do I would attribute
>>it some 'intelligence'.
>
>I disagree -- I think it is wide enough. As I said, people spend tremendous
>time mastering chess and still find more to learn. That's big enough. I agree
>that a program that can handle more than one game without special purpose code
>(no fair making a program that essentially has two modules) exhibits more
>intelligence than one that can only play one game, but I think it's still good
>enough. Fifty years ago it was certainly good enough.
>
>Please don't think that I argue that the exhibition of intelligence by a program
>means that I argue that the program is human or even fractionally so. The
>ability to exhibit intelligent behavior is very complex in humans, and I don't
>think it's necessary for a computer to superset a human before its behavior can
>be labelled intelligent. Otherwise the issue may be whether we can say that the
>program is human.
>
>This may be part of the problem. Humans associate intelligence with humanity,
>and they are very jealous of their humanity.
>
>I don't think that saying that a program solves a problem in intelligent fashion
>is a threat to humans.
>
>>For now traversing Shannon tree with huge speeds and evaluation function
>>'correct' in 99,96% or so I call 'good craftsmanship'.
>
>It takes a hard problem, one that provides humans with decades of challenge, a
>problem that is spoken of in the same breath with art and music, and handles it
>with sufficient skill that humans must take note.
>
>The AI field picked chess as hard solvable case that it could learn from. It
>turns out that you can do chess pretty well without inventing something that
>will win you a Nobel prize.
>
>That doesn't diminish the problem. That alpha-beta plus primitive eval can
>perform so well is actually very interesting.
>
>I think the fact that an intelligent program can be created by a high school kid
>in a few weeks is fascinating.
>
>bruce
>
>>
>>-Andrew-
Great serie of post Bruce. Very much to the point.
Christophe
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.