Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by szemet 2750 days ago
AlphaZero made choices in chess, and learned from them. So did I get you right: it had a free-will because it is a necessity for this behavior according to you? Because mere "machines" can't make decisions, and can't learn from consequences.
1 comments
naasking 2750 days ago
> AlphaZero made choices in chess, and learned from them. So did I get you right: it had a free-will because it is a necessity for this behavior according to you?

That's domain-specific learning, not general learning. If you could then take AlphaZero out for coffee to talk about a match and why it made certain choices, I'm fairly certain you'd be less confident that it wouldn't qualify.

> Because mere "machines" can't make decisions, and can't learn from consequences.

I disagree. Humans are a type of machine.

link
ajuc 2750 days ago
Am I getting you right? If Alpha Go was able to hold a conversation you'd assume it has a free will? Even if you know it's a program on a deterministic computer?

Or do you say it's impossible to make such a program on deterministic computer, and will never be possible, no matter how far IT develops?

link
naasking 2750 days ago
If a computer is able to hold a conversation about any topic, was able to understand and learn from its choices and explain its thought process leading up to a choice, then yes, it has free will.

I have no doubt whatsoever that computer programs could have free will, even deterministic ones. The qualities that are relevant for free will simply have nothing to do with determinism.

link
ajuc 2750 days ago
You seem to define free will in a very strange way. It seems to me the words you are defining is consciousness and intelligence, and not free will?

If I predict what you will ask and record the responses on a tape perfectly timed to your future questions, and then press play and leave it playing as you are asking questions - does this tape player have a free will? It seems to learn because it answers as if it learnt.

link
naasking 2750 days ago
> You seem to define free will in a very strange way.

Rather, you are coming into this debate with certain assumptions about what "free will" means or what properties it must have. Most such assumptions have been invalidated over the past few centuries. The whole debate over free will is about defining what it means and what properties it has.

My position is that of Compatibilism, which is the same as that held by most philosophers on this question. It's "strange" only in the sense that people sometimes find it surprising that free will can be compatible with determinism.

> If I predict what you will ask and record the responses on a tape perfectly timed to your future questions, and then press play and leave it playing as you are asking questions - does this tape player have a free will? It seems to learn because it answers as if it learnt.

"Seems to" is not the same as "did". Also pointing out a bizarre outcome by assuming an impossible precondition, ie. predicting everything I will ask, is not a compelling argument.

link