source

Transcript:
Elon: The actual number of moves that are not utterly stupid in chess is tiny and chess will be fully solved one day

Chess.com: Skill issue

Elon: Chess is hard for humans, but not for computers. One day, it will be fully solved like checkers. Between now and then, or even after, have fun. People enjoy may games/sports where machines are vastly better.

Chess.com: There are more possible chess games, by about 40 order of magnitude, than atoms in the observable universe. To solve chess, you’d have to map them all. Good luck.

Elon: Wrong, all legal chess positions are ~40 ooms less than the estimated atoms in the Universe. And ASI will figure out ways to solve and compress that are far beyond what we could possibly comprehend. (Here I am arguing with some random intern at a chess website)

Chess.com: I’m a full-time employee

Elon: (something-emoji)

Chess.com: Even my friends don’t text me back that fast

  • wrinkle2409@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Being able to solve checkers doesn’t mean people will stop enjoying playing checkers. It is true that chess could be solved, although you don’t really need to brute force every single possibility ‘by hand’ as that guy implied, but it won’t mean people will stop playing it

    • MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 month ago

      Man with no friends doesn’t understand the point of playing a game beyond “solving” and “winning” the game. I wonder why he has no friends.

    • vrek@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t understand why people play tennis, I can solve tennis without any Ai. All you need is a wall.

      I don’t understand why people compete in swimming. A motorized raft could cross that pool so much faster.

      I don’t understand why people read anymore. Text to speech has been around for decades.

      I don’t understand why people look at sunsets. Realistic photographs have been around for dozens of years.

      What do you mean I have multiple psychological disorders? I have a lot of money so I must be perfect.

      /s this is all a joke, I understand the concept of having fun and playing

      • CubitOom@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Walls, rafts, and even text to speech are all things that have helped humanity. “Solving chess” will not benefit us at all, it will just be a benchmark to sell to investors.

        • vrek@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well yeah true but not the point. People play chess because they enjoy playing chess. People play tennis, swimming and reading because they enjoy those activities. They don’t need to be “solved” because it’s the act of doing which is the benefit.

          In contrast not many people “enjoy” say doing laundry. They enjoy having clean clothes. The end goal is the benefit. People don’t enjoy calculating the standard deviation of 1500 data points. No one is excited on Friday because that weekend they will get to do that. It might be useful for something, may lead to other discoveries, or help them with completing some other task but the result is the goal not the act.

          People may be excited because they are going on a hike that weekend. The act of hiking is the goal. People enjoy bike riding. Yeah it’s “solved” since you can just have a car/motorcycle take you anywhere much faster with less effort but people enjoy the act of riding a bike.

    • nymnympseudonym@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      you don’t really need to brute force every single possibility

      And Elon is reading the correct CS/math blogs by pointing out that only legal moves need to be considered.

      If he was a little more on his toes, he might point out that Go has a vastly larger state-space than chess, yet it was one of the first problems that fell to GenAI, which is able to find crazy-complex high-dimensional heuristics/“intuition” navigating such spaces.

      • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Naw it wasn’t genAI, it was the deep learning stuff that came before, when ML was still cool.

        • nymnympseudonym@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          It was one of the first instances of genAI. The team at Google figured out that you take a classifier, flip it round to make a generator, then set it against the classifier to train itself

      • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 month ago

        Except, Go isn’t a solved game. Which is what we’re taking about here.

        Elon doesn’t read anything except social media posts.

        • nymnympseudonym@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Go isn’t a solved game

          Depends what you mean by “solved”

          Mapped the entire state space so next move is just a lookup in a huge table? No, Universe not big enough.

          Game is no longer generally winnable by humans no matter their level of skill? Yes, that happened.

          • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Moving the goalposts.

            What I mean is simply the definition of a solved game. From any position, the outcome of the game can be correctly predicted assuming both players play perfect moves from then on.

            You’ll note that Go is not on the list, but is down under ‘partially solved’ as it has weak solves (solved under limited conditions) only at a 5x5 and 7x7 board in 2015.

            Humans play on a 19x19 board, which is 145 orders of magnitude above 7x7. It’ll not likely be solved by an LLM until it has storage space, RAM, and processing speed several-dozen orders of magnitude larger than all that which currently exists on Earth.

      • CubitOom@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I wouldn’t say Go “fell to GenAI”

        Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo in historic human victory

        The world’s top Go player notches a 2-1 comeback win against the most powerful Go engine, raising hope for human intellect in the AI era

        As the article shows, the Pros don’t treat AI the same as a human player and often don’t attack its weaknesses and instead try to find more interesting ways to defeat it and learn more about the game.

        “I noticed KataGo tends to match moves if I open on the opposite komoku, but I didn’t want to win that way,” Shin said. Komoku is the Japanese term for the three-to-four point on a Go board.

        Although it should be noted that Shin Jin-seo did start with a 2 stone handicap. But this also alters the AI to play more risky moves it wouldn’t normally.

        One thing that is super cool about Go is the ability to add a handicap.

        • nymnympseudonym@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          A handful of prodigies are still able to sometimes beat the AI.

          I count that as solved, the same way a few crumbs on my plate means I have “finished” my meal