[TaupeRanger]

You're getting downvotes but honestly I agree. Who cares about board games? We should've moved on from this once we "solved" chess and Go. There are more important things and it's not remotely surprising that a computer can beat a human when there's a simple, abstract optimization problem to throw computing power at. Make it creative...now that's a challenge worthy of the top AI talent.

[newswasboring]

I agree. I have always wondered if I can feed GPT-3 a bunch of rule books and ask it to generate game rules.

[kadoban]

You haven't seen AlphaGo play Go then, it plays creatively as hell at points.

[TaupeRanger]

It might play creatively, but it doesn't create any useful knowledge by doing so, making it kind of amusing but not the kind of creativity anyone is really interested in.

[kadoban]

It creates useful Go knowledge. What else could be asked of it?

[TaupeRanger]

No it doesn't. Human Go players got worse after playing it. No one learned anything useful. The "knowledge" (if you can call it that) is all contained in an abstract, uninterpretable form that is of no use to anyone.

[kadoban]

Who got worse, and how? Seems like a pretty unlikely claim to me on the face of it.

[mudlus]

Knowledge isn't knowledge without an explanation: https://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_way_to_explain...