I agree.

pin it

their was a clear match fixing between move 37 and Move 78 , we do trust and own both of them , we will come up with Move 91

I think your comment may have inspired a crypto venture fund named capital78

pin this plz

LOL

Not really, the car was just slow back then. This was still extraordinary don't get me wrong. Maybe a car going at 40 mph or so.

@@Neurotik51 Debbie downer

​@@Neurotik51call it 30

​@@Neurotik51 selling *far* too short. There is a reason all these experts are reacting as they are. You should look into it.

Same probability they said for AlphaGos "move 37".

Yeah

More than that, it likely didn't have the same kind of dataset available on such an unlikely, yet successful move. True innovation.

Your like super smart

0.007% is 7/100 000.

One on the best

I was looking for his commentary but found the hand of god

Yusuph Wickama me!

During lockdown yes

Half way thru it atm

Same found the tv show on tube recently and got back into go. 2 years ago. Playing right now on 100$ board.16 kyu

I mean every move by the AI is a divine move

*The OST starts playing*

​@@sdfsbexactly, and this move beats those

The "God Move". The video later showed that AlphaGo estimated the posibility of a player playing that spot to be 0.076% or approximately 1/12.000. That's why AlphaGo wasnt ready for it. It didnt analyze that whole sequence because it thought no one would play that move.

this seems incredibly likely now that ai is more common

Monte Tree Carlo Search?

​@@robot9295today's AI will absolutely obliterate any human player.

@@aaaaaa-hh8cq thx cpt obv

More like “Da Fuq??”

Yes. On top of that it's so delightful that he said "It was the ónly move."

"And that’s not something you can calculate but only with human intuition you can see that GOD move" Modern KataGo finds it almost instantly (though after thinking about it some more it decides it's not quite the best move in the position).

It was more of a unpredictable move. Many have said there were othet viable moves but lee seedol basically saw ahead to what moves were not predictable

Go couldn't be calculated completely so there's always a God move... out of gazillions.

AI is still in the baby stages though lol, the newest models likely will never lose to a human

Comment of the year so far :D

Yes. But this was 6 years ago before the AI boom. Today the AIs will absolutely obliterate any human any time.

@@aaaaaa-hh8cq I get that point. What I would say is alpha go was a self learning ai as it played it got better yet he won on a comeback after being dominated a few games.

@@weignerleigner3037 yes, that was a remarkable achievement

it's not that, it's that the probability of a human playing that move is 0.007%.

The God Move 78 exposed a very real weakness of the technology behind the DeepMind. A woman is now in prison because the same weakness of the same technology killed a person crossing the road at night while pushing a bicycle. The corporation behind the technology refused to take responsibility and blamed it on the woman sitting in the driver's seat.

@@reasonerenlightened2456 it is the woman's responsibility. Like testla said the driver should be aware while driving. She wasn't. End case. She is indeed guilty

not really

@@reasonerenlightened2456 DeepMind and what you are talking about are different situations. This woman is 100% responsible for what happened.

ukposts.info/have/v-deo/m3OHa4yofJ2Bk5s.html&ab_channel=GoProYeonwoo the why

It short circuited a super computer. That pretty much legitimizes it as a divine move.

I would like this comment but it has 78 likes

@@paysonfox88 the model didn't have that type of move in its dataset anywhere, it had no idea what to do and just started spitting garbage

If you want to defeat such AI systems, AlphaGo has to make it available to the world. So that everyone can play against them. I'm pretty sure there are some people who can be found who don't play at a Dan level, but can defeat AlpgaGo because they've found vulnerabilities in AlphaGo's system. I think that's only possible in Go (as opposed to chess) because in Go the possibilities are so diverse.

@@PrivateKero you're definitely right. But I wouldnt hold my breath for a human to be able to consistently beat alphago. Keep in mind these systems also improve

@TheWearyWarlord But I'm more concerned that AI systems aren't perfect. If you look at AI of the image recognition, there are images that the system recognizes wrong and there is so directly no solution why the AI can not. AlphaGo will have such holes. And the more people can test AlphaGo, the more likely it will be to detect its weaknesses. You don't need millions of tries, you need someone to find it and AlphaGo will probably lose every game.

This machines are erasing the fun of the game

That is the purpose of a dedicated AI. It will be the best in what it is designed to do. However, it is not true AI. True AI can learn to be good in anything just like a human can. We are not there yet. Thankfully.

I'm lost. How and when was this a divine move? What constitutes a divine move?

@@njjx8800 it's a move that changes the entire flow of the game, that was this kind of move

Sai would be proud

The refutation of the move led to a 40+ pt ko fight, so it was really the Divine move. Gu Li, his rival said that he believed it worked -- and it did!

@@cytr5 o(〃＾▽＾〃)o

inevitable stembug fate, just hope that your job gets outsourced to india quickly

you are not alone mate. you are not alone. I used to do machine learning stuff as well. the people that I used to work together has either gone DeepMind or MIT and I went to a completely shitty path lol but I dont feel that miserable about it anymore. I am actually kinda happy with the path that I chose.

It's never too late.

lol u mad bro

Damn this comment was made before LLM Ai chatbots became mainstream.

@@jhwhthemerciful If we follow the gospels scattered across small places of the internet, we come to the realization Sam Q-ltman was sent to bring forth the apocalypse and usher the age of human obsolescence.

@@m4r_art 😂 you might not be wrong

@@jhwhthemerciful According to ancient Sumerian scriptures Baal tempted the ancient people of Canaan BAAL can also be read as Baai it has the suffix AI. Bible Verses about Baal: Jeremiah 23:13 - In the prophets of Samaria (=Sam Altman) I saw an unsavory thing: they prophesied by Baal (CHATGPT) and led my people astray. 1 Samuel 7:4 - So the people put away the Baals and the Ashtaroth, and they served the Lord only. (books and analogue media) x) beware the samuels of history

it's depressing isn't it. Every time Humanity makes an advancement against AI it's like an opportunity for AI to supersede us.

@@thebookwaswaybetter2827 A miracle move can be patched up within days LOL

@@thebookwaswaybetter2827 not depressing, every father wants his son to surpass him. The real failure would be if we were only able to make dumb stuff.

@@thebookwaswaybetter2827 you could interpret that as us also advancing. These things show that humans are somewhat rushing themselves now to compensate.

If u build a car ..its u who's the genius not the car , think about that

Software tester.

yep in a numbers game, we will surely lose against a computer.

@@nsebast but he did beat it in 1 game

Truly shows how magnificent the human brain is.

​@@Shootskas After that Alpha Go was upgraded. New Alpha Go beat the Alpha Go version Lee Sedol played against 1000 to 0.

@@MrDulguN Then AlphaGo Zero was upgraded to "AlphaZero" and is even BETTER than AGZ AND it plays chess and shogi

Supposedly he retired because he was tired of the "politics" involved in the go scene, not because of AI.

​@@muuubiee He spoke more on it when he appeared on the korean variety show Master of the House and said his match with AlphaGo did play a significant role in his retirement. That when they described it as "did it feel like coming up against a immovable wall as your opponent," he said it was not wrong to put it like that.

Its not hope at all, all it means is the ai will learn from that to never make the same mistake, all this “it will never replace us” actually will be the downfall of society

@@jasonv6319 in what regard will it be "the downfall of society" ? Really interested in what you mean by that.

no the current AI are sooo far above the alpha go lee sedol played They are just too far out of reach by now

Us bro us 😂😂

really? and he was still thrashed. and alphago is just computer codes.

@@damontan4749 "Just" computer codes... Those computer codes make your brain look like a dump - nah, that would even be too good... It's natural that a human couldn't beat a computer at pretty much anything, but that doesn't make Lee Sedol less of a genius. Also, you can't just call it a mistake whenever someone reads something out better than you; yet, that's what they did.

Mr Tan has no soul, the poor thing.

@@damontan4749 not just codes, but really good math

​@@damontan4749 The God Move 78 exposed a very real weakness of the technology behind the DeepMind. A woman is now in prison because the same weakness of the same technology killed a person crossing the road at night while pushing a bicycle. The corporation behind the technology refused to take responsibility and blamed it on the woman sitting in the driver's seat.

Definitely should watch it

Vinsu Karma it isn’t about fast thinking or millions of games. It is about understanding space.

@@CravensPhD Yeah of course it can't think that many moves ahead for all possible moves. But it does think that far ahead for the moves it thinks are good which is based on the human games it trained on. I think it's hard to say it understands space, but it does have the capability of finding moves humans cannot.

Only brute force engines "think" move ahead. AI like Alphago, just compute the statistical probability of a movie leading to a win, based on weightings that have adjusted over millions of games. Its a statistical model, that's all.

@@Serfdomftw I agree, it's not intelligence and nothing like the fucking brain. Frankly, the idea is pretty easy to understand/common sense. Play a huge number of games against yourself, scan through all the games, and find which moves lead to wins and which ones lead to losses. Now use those moves and play against yourself again, scan through the games, find the good and the bad. Do it again and again and eventually you will find the most powerful moves using raw statistics. Nothing "intelligent" about it.

​@@RiemannHypothesis2 Well, this kind of machine learning is slightly beyond than what you could call glorified statistics. It might work for simpler games with a relatively small space of possible moves, but not with Go. You could call MCTS (Monte Carlo Tree Search) "raw statistics". This technique consists in trying one possible move, see where it goes (i.e. randomly simulate an execution of a whole game starting from the current configuration plus said move), and adjust the estimate of winning probability of that move. If tons of paths lead to defeat, well, let's try another move. This is how MCTS evaluate whether a given position / move is likely to lead to a win or a defeat. "oh this move lead to 900 defeats out of 1000 randomly generated game, while this one merely to 4 out of 1000, let's play this". Just pure statistics and probability. Since it's often impossible to simulate all possible sequences of moves, there's some simple heuristics at play to decide which part of the tree to expand next. One could make the argument that optimizing these heuristics is some kind of "learning", but I'd agree that it's not a great one. MCTS is quite old and can work pretty damn well for some problems, but you could say it's just "raw statistics" at the end. MCTS with standard heuristics can work with chess, but most definitely not with go. The search space is just too large. Absurdly large. You cannot compute simple statistics here. What we need is some kind of oracle that could "intuitively" evaluate whether overall position is winning or losing. What I mean by "intuitively" is "without simulating millions if not billions of possible games from that point", since it doesn't work with go. And this is what AlphaGo does. No other engine or algorithm managed to achieve such feat before, beside humans. Now, one ought to differentiate AlphaGo from any kind "artificial general intelligence". But what it does isn't mere "raw statistics". Not to mention that there's some evidence that what our brain does approximates some kind of bayesian inference, which is the heart of (machine) learning.

@@jakelee7083 actually its quite interesting, plus it was 1000-0 not 150. AlphaGo BEAT Lee 4-1, created several strategies that changed conventional wisdom, and made Go look pitifully easy against a Top champion. AlphaGo Zero learned from AlphaGo, and surpassed it in 48 hours. That is insane

@@jakelee7083 I mean the way alphago plays isn't only by searching through trees otherwise we wouldn't be using neural nets, and these games still have the potential to change the way people play go and may find new strategies like with what happened in chess. So there is something to be gained from ai vs ai still.

yeonwoo a pro korean player made an english video explaining the move and how alpha go should have answered

bro gave his king a machine gun

😂

You are right .. that is not fair .. removing that.

wtf you talking about

put down the weed

Maradona left the chat

dude it's Kami no Itte though?

@@M-yue882 .. a literal translation often gives the wrong idea. This is no exception.

Because they can't do that yet, this is a step in the right direction

@@nuclearsummer7796 Machines can already do work, that is the point of a machine.

We are using AI to do those things. However, it is very difficult because it is in the real world. We still need advancements in other areas because their techniques can be used to solve other problems.

It's Go, the oldest popularly played board game in the world. The clip is from the documentary "AlphaGo".

Rizwan Ullah thanks mate

It is the weirdest game ever played by the weirdest people.

@@x78340 Its the most complex game ever invented, It took around 20 years to the machines to defeat the world chess champion (1997) , it took almost 20 years more to the machines to develop and "learn" how to defeat the world go champion

@@x78340 probably smartest game played by smartest people more complex than chess

I guess it also has to do with 'creating' the formula that is used for the calculation. Those formules have come many time through by a stroke of genius. Inexplicable but as a result of a complete rational mastery of the principles and then somehow some higher order insight suddenly comes through. Like how Watson got his vision about the structure of the DNA molecule. So as I understand it, that's what makes Go so highly valued in Asia, because of the genius of the aesthetic sense that makes the difference between intelligent players and creative players. For this it comes to some kind of holistic aesthetic intuitive grasp that senses the delicate equilibrium of a state of affairs and can push that equilibrium just over the edge with one move. That is supposed to be that human quality that ought to be superior to a mere endless calculation of a computer program. And, as I understood it, the thing with Go is that is has a more or less infinite possibility grid, unlike chess. So the computer cannot calculate the consequence of every possibility to it's fullest extent, this combined with the lack of that human quality lead to the idea that AlphaGo wouldn't stand a chance. That's why Sedol was so confident that his superior aesthetic and intuitive sense that demolishes his opponents normally would be no match for the AlphaGo. And that's what everybody thought. If you give the best mathematician enough time it could calculate the same things as the calculator. The shock here is that AlphaGo seems to master exactly those intuitive entered hyper dimensions of the game, that metaphysical realm where the strange quantum phenomenons are possible I suppose. That's also why it so fascinating that AlphaGo could get 'delusional' and go completely of the rails while it 'thinks' it's playing like the greatest mind ever conjured.

That’s not a valid argument at all. And no, a calculator cannot outperform the best mathematician. Being a great mathematician isn’t how fast you can do arithmetics. SMH. Without a math book and just using your calculator, figure out the speed of a sailboat with 15mi tail wind and consistent 3 foot waves causing negative friction…yeah didn’t think so. You can go ahead and use a math book, you probably still couldn’t figure it out. Why? Because it would take a great mathematician.

@@DigThugDoug for real. Him/her and 5 other people must have never went beyond high school mathematics.

Then why the 4th match? It dosen't really make sense dude

Yeah, they stacked the deck so Sedol would easily come up with that 1 in 10.000 move nobody dared even thinking of.