We are in agreement on the general nature of things, but seeing it in
person was just so amazing. I did see comments about the quality of
the pro, but it may have been in the game chat rather than here. I
slept very little over the 10 days in Portland, so things are all
mixed up in my head.
Cheers,
David
On 10, Aug 2008, at 1:06 PM, Mark Boon wrote:
On 10-aug-08, at 13:11, David Doshay wrote:
As an aside, the pro in question won the US Open, so comments about
him being a weak pro seem inappropriate.
I don't see where anybody questioned the level of the pro. As far as
I'm concerned I consider a Korean (is that correct?) 8-dan pro to be
close enough to the ultimate top as to be indistinguishable for the
sake of this discussion.
All I tried to do was put this achievement in perspective to other
achievements in the past. I don't think anybody disputes the great
progress that has been made either, no matter the hardware
requirements.
I don't think a computer will beat a pro on even in ten years just
using the faster hardware that will be avaliable by then. I believe
considerable improvements will have to be made in the software as
well. Is it impossible? No, it's not impossible. But it's impossible
to make predictions about it, IMO. If I had to put money on it I'd
rather go for 20 years than 10 years. But even 20 years isn't going
to be a lay-up.
But if in ten years we have a million-CPU computer to our disposal
and there has been progress in the software in the order of 4-5
stones as well we might be getting close. I say 'might', as I'd like
to see more games. Considering the low availability of such a
powerful computer, that data needed to make stronger claims is a bit
hard to come by.
Mark
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
