<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.gmail-msonormal, li.gmail-msonormal, div.gmail-msonormal
{mso-style-name:gmail-msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.gmail-hoenzb
{mso-style-name:gmail-hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>John Clark<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>>…</span>I still haven’t convinced myself it is true.<span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=gmail-msonormal>>…To figure out all that in a day requires some powerful inference activity. John I am putting myself in the camp of hope it’s true, but estimate 70% chance it isn’t. I don’t know how the hell they did this if true.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>If this is a hoax it's a very elaborate one the likes of which we haven't seen since the cold fusion fiasco. </span><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>And the hoax would involve a huge company like Google and that doesn't seem very likely.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815v1.pdf">https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815v1.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>John K Clark </span><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ja I could have clarified my doubt a bit. I don’t suspect an intentional hoax, rather something they neglected to tell us. For instance… if these games are speed chess, with a really short time limit such as 4 minutes total per game. If so, I would call it plausible, but that is slightly different. Reasoning: for those really short games the standard software doesn’t use the standard pruning techniques, the look at everything a certain number of plies. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I suppose it is plausible a learning routine could get better at that high-speed stuff than the standard routines. Speed chess doesn’t require the kinds of insights into the game that legions of humans have discovered in 5 centuries of play. Those are highly tactical rather than strategic (the way top-ranked humans tend to play.) Computers are crazy good at tactics.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>However… I looked over some of those games they are claiming and it sure doesn’t look a bit like blitz chess to me.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>So for now, I am going to hope for the best, keep my head in the clouds while keeping my feet on the ground.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>spike<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>