10 MAR 2019 by ideonexus

 How Computational Review of Chess Games Revealed Narrativ...

Paradoxically, when other top players wrote about games in magazines and newspaper columns they often made more mistakes in their commentary than the players had made at the board. Even when the players themselves published analyses of their own games they were often less accurate than when they were playing the game. Strong moves were called errors, weak moves were praised. It was not only a few cases of journalists who were lousy players failing to comprehend the genius of the champions, or...
  1  notes
 
10 MAR 2019 by ideonexus

 Processing Power to Chess Rating Ratio

50 here is what the Deep Thought team wrote about the relationship between search depth and chess strength in a 1989 article: The ascent of the brute-force chess machines back in the late 1970s made one thing crystal clear: there is a strong causal relationship between the search speed of a chess machine and its playing strength. In fact, it appeared from machine self-test games that every time a machine searches one extra ply, its rating increases by about 200-250 rating points. Since each...
  1  notes
 
10 MAR 2019 by ideonexus

 Computers are All Tactics and No Strategy

Chess computers don't have psychological faults, but they do have very distinct strengths and weaknesses, far more distinct than any equivalently strong human player would have. Today, they are so strong that most of their vulnerabilities have been steamrolled into irrelevancy by the sheer speed and depth of brute force search. They cannot play strategically, but they are too accurate tactically for a human to exploit those subtle weaknesses decisively. A tennis player with a 250-m.p.h. serve...
  1  notes
 
19 MAR 2015 by ideonexus

 We are the Dreams of a Future AI

An evolving cyberspace becomes effectively ever more capacious and long lasting, and so can support ever more minds of ever greater power. If these minds spend only an infinitesimal fraction of their energy contemplating the human past, their sheer power should ensure that eventually our entire history is replayed many times in many places, and in many variations. The very moment we are now experiencing may actually be (almost certainly is) such a distributed mental event, and most likely is ...
  1  notes

From Hans Moravec's "Pigs in Cyberspace"

07 NOV 2014 by ideonexus

 Computronium

In programmable matter, the same cubic meter of machinery can become a wind tunnel at one moment, a polymer soup at the next; it can model a sea of fermions [elementary particles], a genetic pool, or an epidemiology experiment at the flick of a console key. Ten times as large a simulation will simply require ten cubic meters of machinery, instead of one. Flexibility, instant reconfigurability, variable resolution, total accessibility, and handling safety make such programmable matter worth a ...
  1  notes
 
06 NOV 2014 by ideonexus

 Human Communication with Matrioshka Brains

Communication between humans and MB is essentially pointless.  The computational capacity difference between a MB and a human is on the order of 1016 (ten million billion) times greater than the difference between a human and a nematode (~109)!  A single MB can emulate the entire history of human thought in a few microseconds.  It is important to consider that intelligence may not be a linear process.  There is a rather large difference between the...
  1  notes
 
06 NOV 2014 by ideonexus

 Matrioshka Brains

Matrioshka Brains (MB)1 are megascale computers constructed out of microelectronic and/or nanoscale components.  MB may be constructed as shells around a star (internally powered Matrioshka Brains: IPMB) or may be constructed independently of a star if large amounts of power are harvested from stars in other locations and beamed to the MB (externally powered Matrioshka Brains: EPMB).  A third variant, (self-powered Matrioshka Brains: SPMB) which generates power via controlled n...
 1  1  notes