OXO, Checkers, Chess & now Go

I'm not a transhumanist or a singularity cultist, but I think this story is a bit more interesting than that. Go is not just a harder version of ches s.

To the extent what you're saying is true for computers but not for people, the only possible additional factors are either (a) random; (b) chaotic; or (c) supernatural. Given a source of entropy, we can make a computer behav e as irrationally as any human. We do that all the time whether we want to or not. And there's little distinction between (a) and (b) as far as our minds or our computers are concerned.

So, is (c) what your argument will eventually have to fall back on? The so ul of a wet machine?

-- john, KE5FX

c) Quantum mechanical. QM *is* supernatural.

is a bit more interesting than that. Go is not just a harder version of c hess.

e, the only possible additional factors are either (a) random; (b) chaotic; or (c) supernatural. Given a source of entropy, we can make a computer be have as irrationally as any human. We do that all the time whether we want to or not. And there's little distinction between (a) and (b) as far as o ur minds or our computers are concerned.

soul of a wet machine?

Quantum mechanics is perfectly natural, though obviously the nature involve d has to be perceived through instruments, rather than our senses.

Actually it is a game of perfect information so bluffing doesn't enter into it. But psychology can - and against a weaker opponent you might risk something that leads to a quick win but is unsound against a stronger player. Starting off with eccentric openings for example or an unsound sacrifice relying on the most obvious response being incorrect.

That they are games of perfect information doesn't not make them any less games. Poker and backgammon are games of imperfect information where bluffing and luck does play a significant part in the outcome.