Tracks and numbers
On 16 march 2016, a seminar on “the impact of the human war on the chess culture”, organized by the national journal of the day of light and the national network of sciences, was held at the yulong international hotel in beijing, for the benefit of your experts。
The impact of human war on chess culture
Lucky qiu
Vice-chancellor, university of the capital
What we are talking about today is a new topic for the future. The national science network has also sponsored events such as china chess chess spectroscopy integration, which is a historical compilation; the national cup is a competition for amateur chess, and so on. The symposium, on the other hand, was a future-oriented event that was very interesting。
Yoon kobayashi
Director, institute of electronic documentation, university of the capital
I've been reading the chess page and some media reports these days, and i have three feelings:
The first is the upper hand of the strong. In the chess world, whoever has a higher level has more say. Computer software had previously been low-level and had little say. When the alphago software came out this time, the chess player started being modest。
Second is the road to jane. The biggest thing is simple. Today we have also invited experts in zhou yi, whose “easiness” is synonymous with the “playing” of the game, which is often synonymous in goohan. When a game as complex as chess can be reduced to a binary, it connects to elysium。
The third is the weak balance. The world cannot live with the strong, the weak and the strong. For example, mr. Wang yuan is in the eighth part of his career and i am in the third part of my career. If he gives up five or six children, we'll have a balance. In fact, our culture is good, chess is good, chow is good, chinese medicine is good, it's balanced. Much of this drone war is forcing us to think about history, modernity and the future, and we need to think about the significance of this race from a cultural perspective。
Wang won
Deputy editor-in-chief of the world of chess
I was sad and happy to find out these days that, within a range, at least in my friends' circles, i was the only one who held the same view as me。
First, i feel like paying tribute to google. Because science is different, before the drone fight, before the game with alpha go, someone texted me. I texted back after i finished reading the first game of zoo and alphago, and i thought artificial intelligence was a bottleneck in the sense of time and space and in the sense of art. Those plates are a mess in my eyes. And i wrote this: "the chess machine can change, and google will go up." now it may seem a bit ridiculous. I've seen it before, and i didn't believe it. I thought it would be hard to see computers beat human brains。
Google's "work" and "work" are remarkable. I hear alphago spends $200 on electricity for the next game of chess in practice, so it's down to tens of millions, more than a billion dollars. If alphago does not achieve this alarming effect, it is in the wild。
Secondly, i salute lee se-suk. I look at his chess and i want to cry a few times. It will be recalled that at the time of the wenchuan earthquake in 2008, lee shi-seok and zhao han-ship decided to donate all the prizes to sichuan-affected areas before the finals of the asian cup. I don't remember any other athletes who were in similar situations abroad. I think lee se-suk is a little light on this game. I was watching the chess game with alphago, and i didn't think the top chess player was enough. After a while, lee sek-suk said that zhu and alphago, he could both. From the chess pages at that time, he said nothing, and i was happy to agree with him。
I don't think this is fair to lee se-suk. Lee se-suk is actually playing chess with himself, because google has read all his chess books and has studied, analyzed, chosen and turned into something that i don't think is its own. I thought it might be different if i went down there and the computer didn't know my chess book and thought i was lee se-suk. And it's not fair for people to spend the same time as machines, and if people spend 10 hours, the machines take two hours. But these lee shi-seoks didn't mention it. They played the wrong game and didn't say he was a man。
With the flag of google alphago, the chess culture will grow better in the future, but alphago is not above humanity. Its existence marks the beginning of a new branch of the chess culture。
Over the past few days, mainstream public opinion considered alphago to be crushing and sweeping lee se-suk. We all have any human dimension that is psychologically, artificially, intelligently, as long as we're not professionals. So when i was watching chess, when i said that alphago was one of the shallow, indescribable steps, one of my chess buddies would argue with me, and subconsciously thought alphago was right. This is a cultural phenomenon. When alphago won lee se-suk by three cents, a chess player texted me to the highest extent possible to celebrate google chess, and i replied, "yes. But i don't believe it. I'm sure lee se-suk won at least one of the last two games, so testify for me.”
Lee shi-shek's mind is changing. Because of information asymmetries, he had no idea that google had reached such a level in the first round only six months. At the time of the initial encounter, he had deliberately demonstrated a pattern that he thought alphago might not have seen, which was his strategic error. Using alphago as a machine, he had always wanted to lower within a reasonable range the number of roads that the machine had not seen and thought that it would be more successful. It's a bad move, actually, he just needs to think of alphago as a normal expert。
There are a lot of mistakes in these five sets, but even many of our pros are beginning to superstition google and think that alphago is right. For example, in the fifth game, black chess was eaten on the lower right corner. Blackjack 25, lee se-suk has lost almost a piece of chess, and then close to 300, which is the equivalent of lee se-suk having to go first with alphago, and end up missing two pieces. From a chess point of view, alphago, though great, is not so perfect. But public opinion has seen alphago as god。
Look at these five games, alphago's chess path is very specific, and it's taken 300 years ago from huang, shuxia, benjong, benjian, but more from wu qingjin, because of its many tipping points, which is the symbolism of wu qingjin. The sharpness is a little bit more of itself, a little more of each other, rather than killing them. There are kato jung-fuh, li chang-chul, wumong jung-soo and hashimoto。
Alphago gave us a pole, a reference, and chess became a worldwide cross-border cultural topic. I've written a seven-year book called "the war on humans."
It's good to go to google, and the guests are not blackmailed。
The elves don't move, the thoughts are not magnetic waves。
When the time is right, you know that the past has been biased。
And let not his heart be smitten with a bow, and the stone be with him asunder。
Over the past decade, professional chess has become increasingly oriented towards “results theory”, which has somewhat hindered the development of a chess culture. Today's chess players don't learn from the ancients, they only want to win in fast chess. And it was with our ancient wisdom that alphago defeated us。
Lin jianxi
Vice-president, chinese chess association
For a long time, as the oldest and most complex intellectual game of humankind, the chess holds our pride; as the only game in the world that has not been defeated by computers, the chess carries our superiority. Chess gives us a sense of spiritual pleasure, a sense of life and the charm of chinese culture. The outcome of this chess game has shocked people about the strength of artificial intelligence. There are even some of our lovers, our network, who feel a sense of panic and disillusionment, not just professional chess players, but merely chess games, and also of chess itself。
It forces us to think, is there any charm in the game after the war
The nature of the current drone war is also a race between people and the tools they invent. It is also a measure, an experiment, in other words, an essentially scientific experimental activity. At this stage, apart from proving to what extent the machine invented by humans can achieve the mental capacity that was previously considered impossible by humans, the purpose of the invention of alphago is to be said from the point of view of the chess community to be a better tool for the development of chess. Our competition with alphago is not a race between humans and another subject of life. Now, however, the main tone of our chess world is precisely that. Now we're dissatisfied, so there's the battle of corjeeyo. Zubin thinks no, guly thinks five, nine paragraphs, and so on, are actually the same idea that people and their own tools are better than their own. The chess world must come out of this mindset. Just like we humans invented cars, we're never going to think now, "will people run faster than cars?" people invented airplanes, and now they think, "will people fly higher than planes?" the tools must exceed the physical and mental capacity of the human being, otherwise what are the tools of human creation? So the first thing we need to do is figure out the nature of the human war。
All those who work on computer chess know that it must come from a priori knowledge. This a priori knowledge is precisely the inheritance, development, extension and innovation of the ideas and principles of chess that have accumulated over the millennia of humankind. Can't we understand a step in alphago's approach? Is one step unacceptable to us? Perhaps we did not think that some feelings might be unreasonable and that you could make value judgements about them, but there is no incomprehensible or unacceptable。
Our concepts of power, location, generality, efficiency, order, scale, balance, communication, siege, robbery, advantage, victory, best points, etc., are often abstract and vague. Is it possible, on the basis of the wealth of data accumulated, for a computer-based chess exercise to quantify, characterize, visualize, digitize and refine it, but is it beyond the framework of these principles that we humans have proposed? Nothing. Every move by alphago, we now do not seem to be incomprehensible or even familiar. Computer chess does not change the way humans think about it, but rather breaks some of the thinking that people at some stage have used to. Computer chess shows us different models of chess thinking, different paths to the ideal world. But we cannot say that it has gone beyond the thinking of humans, but that it has merely materialized those great principles, ideas, models that we have described. Since chess is a closed game, it remains limited in its capacity to carry human intelligence and thinking. In this closed game of chess, it is impossible for a computer to get out of a game that is completely different from human thinking。
Artificial intelligence chess cannot mask its deep cultural content and social functions. Philosophy, strategy, planning, aesthetics, art, breeding, psychology. These are the most attractive things in the game, which are essentially spiritual, created by intellectual games, and therefore cannot be replaced, erased or concealed by simple digital programs. Through the human war, we have actually brought a new spirit to the game in the face of new facts. Our awareness has been strengthened, our faith has been strengthened and our love has been strengthened. There are many things that we did not know in the past, or that we recognize that we do not have such a clear and bold expression。
The development of artificially intelligent chess makes it more attractive. This human war has increased the visibility of chess throughout humanity. I don't know about chess. It's a shame. The new space for innovation in the game of chess and the greater content of the game of chess culture, the way in which chess education may be more self-improving for its assistants, especially alphago, has been inspired by the need to improve the quality of our own human being, in the form of learning, training, adaptation and reinforcement。
Excerpts from the 16th edition of the daily light, 21 march (with deletions)
