Yes, I agree with you on most of this. However, I believe that Go is a very simple domain in some sense and that we romanticize it too much. I am not saying there is not amazing depth to it, but it's represented very compactly and it's a game of perfect information with very limited choices.
Having said that, I do fully appreciate that even if Moores law could hold indefinitely, there are still problems that will take decades to overcome if there are no software advances. - Don On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Mark Boon <tesujisoftw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Roger Penrose thinks the human brain can do things a Turing machine cannot. > (Note: I don't say 'computer'.) He claims it's due to some quantum-physical > effects used by the brain. I doubt his ideas are correct, but he did have a > few interesting chess-positions to support his theory. Typically, they would > contain a completely locked position, say a V-shaped pawn position and > bishops on the wrong color to pass the pawn-ranks. These types of positions > are very easily analyzed by even mediocre players, yet a computer never gets > the right answer. > > Basically what it shows is that the human brain is able to conceptualize > certain things that enable it to reason about situations that cannot be > calculated by brute force. I don't claim that a Turing machine cannot do > such things as well if programmed well, but it's very easy to see that there > could be barriers to computers, no matter how much computing power you give > them, if they solely rely on a simple method with brute force. > > 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/
