Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT: 2281-85 (24-28 September 2012) Weekly Comics Discussion Thread
Near Lurker:
Whoever said that to you is wrong. We don't know how to make a computer play go (I am not apologizing for calling it the name just about every English speaker knows it under) well only because we don't yet know how humans do. The methods we use to teach a computer chess and backgammon are clearly inadequate, but that's just a matter of applying the wrong tactic. Consider Kasparov's insistence that Deep Blue was cheating when it saw through a tactic that he though required "creative thinking" - he was making the same mistake as your friend, thinking that a computer cannot duplicate that which we can't immediately see its method of duplicating. No, the fact that humans can be trained to play go well is sufficient evidence that a computer can be taught to.
pwhodges:
But surely the very best players have achieved more than they were simply taught to? Otherwise why are the programs still missing out?
--- Quote from: jmucchiello on 30 Sep 2012, 10:37 ---they also did not write program of nearly the same complexity of programs written today. Imagine implementing a HTML renderer in assembly language that could handle all flavors of HTML and run against any video driver. It could be done but I can imagine it would be very amenable to changes.
--- End quote ---
Less complex, but at least as subtle. And don't imagine that it's not possible to write assembler following strict structured programming guidelines, or even including object techniques.
Pilchard123:
Based partly on posting styles, partly on common sense and partly on that maths...
Carl is 50, Skewbrow is 48/9, Method is 25. Am I anywhere near what you thought Carl? Have I been highly offensive?
Also, I've been learning Go on and off recently. I might see if I can find a Go-by-Internet program (or make one).
Method of Madness:
You got me (and I assume Carl) right, but going on his clues I think it means that Skewbrow is turning 36, not 49.
Wait, no, just checked Skewbrow's profile, he is turning 49, which means that Carl's just a year ahead, not a square and a year.
Carl-E:
Method, checking profiles? Really? That's like looking in the back of the book...
And yes, I forgot that Skewbrow is nearly my age. Sorry! His avatar looks so much younger...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version