Life In 19x19

Jhyn, thanks for your response. You make a lot of good points. Like you, I have been "dominated" by other players for all of my Go career.

Lee Sedol had been a hero of mine. He's just one year older than me, and in some ways, someone I could look up to and admire. After all, he is someone From my generation - someone that put their all into Go. I could never dream of being a pro Go player, but Lee Sedol already is - and I admired him for it.

I had the feeling, "I will never be good enough at Go to be a top player, but Lee Sedol is around my age, and he really is something, isn't he?"

Then, over the course of a couple of months, some people unknown to me bring in their computer program they've been developing for less than a couple of years. And they beat my hero pretty easily.

Maybe it makes me wonder, "Was my hero all that great to begin with? What have I been looking up to?"

It's not a great feeling.

Maybe I am not being that logical. But in any case, the feeling I had, whatever it was, was enough of a shock for me to stop playing Go for awhile - for better or for worse. Maybe I'll change my mind someday.

Kirby wrote:Lee Sedol had been a hero of mine. ... they beat my hero pretty easily.

Maybe it makes me wonder, "Was my hero all that great to begin with? What have I been looking up to?"

Although I was surprised that AlphaGo won the match and how strong it was, I see that as reflection of the progress of computer science research and a reward for the ingenuity and skill of its (human) developers at Deepmind (and all of the other people whose work they built on). I don't see it as detracting from Lee Sedol. In fact the match meant I got to learn more about Lee Sedol, see him in press conferences etc, and my view of him improved. He took the loss graciously, valiantly fought back to win a game and didn't show sour grapes. Lee Sedol is still a great player who plays amazing games and has won numerous championships. That AlphaGo has climbed higher than him doesn't push him backwards or diminish his achievements, it means we have glimpses of higher peaks.

Uberdude wrote:Lee Sedol is still a great player who plays amazing games and has won numerous championships. That AlphaGo has climbed higher than him doesn't push him backwards or diminish his achievements, it means we have glimpses of higher peaks.

I don't think that we have enough evidence to say that AlphaGo has surpassed Lee Sedol.

Not that that matters terribly. I'm pretty sure that computer programs will continue to improve. I also think that we will see an improvement in top players, as well, as a result.

Kirby wrote: It's not just with go. Another "special" part of me has been my study of language. I thought it was neat to know Korean and Japanese when many of my peers didn't. It gave me some sort of pride. But I read the other day that in a matter of years, foreign languages won't be an issue. Computer translation will have advanced such that people could carry microphones to do live translation. When that day comes, my Korean and Japanese abilities will not be special. They will not be unique. They will just be some obscure hobby I spent my time on, which doesn't really matter, since computers can do it better anyway.

Quite the contrary, I think. When it becomes easier and easier to do without speaking a language, those who can will become fewer and fewer. Language is about human contact, and no aided communication will ever facilitate it as well as being able to carry on a normal conversation with someone in their own language.

tj86430 wrote:

NiallMcC wrote:Lee Sedol was the last human to be beaten by a computer.

Should there be a "not" somewhere in this sentence?

No. Computers beat the pants off me years ago. And beat most amateurs. Professnonals have fallen lately, and finally the last and best of us.

End of an era, not a beginning.

NiallMcC wrote:

tj86430 wrote:

NiallMcC wrote:Lee Sedol was the last human to be beaten by a computer.

Should there be a "not" somewhere in this sentence?

No. Computers beat the pants off me years ago. And beat most amateurs. Professnonals have fallen lately, and finally the last and best of us.

End of an era, not a beginning.

So maybe you meant "to beat" not "to be beaten by". Switching a verb into the passive form swaps the object and subject of the beating. And by "computer" your presumably mean "the best computer"?. Because your sentence means that after Lee Sedol in every future human versus computer match, the human will win. However, I saw a computer (CrazyStone), beat a human on KGS just yesterday, so it is obviously false. And even GnuGo could beat any of the 7 billion humans in the world who don't know how to play Go.

NiallMcC wrote:

tj86430 wrote:

NiallMcC wrote:Lee Sedol was the last human to be beaten by a computer.

Should there be a "not" somewhere in this sentence?

No. Computers beat the pants off me years ago. And beat most amateurs. Professnonals have fallen lately, and finally the last and best of us.

End of an era, not a beginning.

Ok, I guess that is one way to understand it.

To me "last human to X" is equal to "no human in future will X", which in this case would mean that no one will ever be beaten by a computer after this (and I think there will be plenty of people to be beaten by computer)

That's why I thought it might have made sense in the form "Lee Sedol was the last human not to be beaten by a computer.", meaning that he was the last player being able to win against (the best of) computers, after him everyone will always lose against (best of) computers.

But, all this is probably because English is not my native language.

tj86430 wrote: But, all this is probably because English is not my native language.

Niall's post doesn't make sense to me (see above, I agree with your interpretation), and English is my native language.

Niall's post doesn't make sense to me ...

Really? Substitute a couple of words:

Lee Sedol was the last human to be beaten by a computer
Lee Sedol was the last hurdle to be overcome by a computer

The first sentence is badly written, of course, being ambiguous, but it makes perfect sense.

John Fairbairn wrote:

Niall's post doesn't make sense to me ...

Really? Substitute a couple of words:

Lee Sedol was the last human to be beaten by a computer
Lee Sedol was the last hurdle to be overcome by a computer

The first sentence is badly written, of course, being ambiguous, but it makes perfect sense.

I'm guessing the key here is whether last means "last ever" or "last so far"

(I sometimes have this problem in Finnish, too. But if Finnish is used properly, "last ever" is "viimeinen" and "last so far" is "viimeisin". In my mind I always translate "last" meaning "viimeinen", while I guess it can also mean "viimeisin". But, couldn't one use the word "latest" to mean "last so far"?)

tj86430 wrote:I'm guessing the key here is whether last means "last ever" or "last so far"

(I sometimes have this problem in Finnish, too. But if Finnish is used properly, "last ever" is "viimeinen" and "last so far" is "viimeisin". In my mind I always translate "last" meaning "viimeinen", while I guess it can also mean "viimeisin". But, couldn't one use the word "latest" to mean "last so far"?)

"Lee Sedol was the last human to play Alpha Go" and "Lee Sedol is the latest human to play Alpha Go" and "Lee Sedol was the latest human to play Alpha Go." (In the last one the past tense could be read as applying to Lee Sedol, i.e. suggesting that he's dead, in the middle one it implies the match series is ongoing).

Cleaner to just say "Lee Sedol was the most recent human to play Alpha Go." Avoids the confusion. Or a construction like "The last/latest human player to play Alpha Go was Lee Sedol." I prefer "most recent," last implies some kind of finality for me, latest implies some kind of ongoing thing. "Most recent" doesn't imply anything other than the order pros played the AI in.

wineandgolover wrote: I think he meant that LSD was the last human to beat a computer (of AG+ strength, of course)

If you want to beat AG, try LSD?

Hehehe, such confusion !

Lee being the last to be beaten means everyone else was already beaten (ok, an untested hypothesis, but lee being the best one can assume he'd beat everyone).

If john is the last kid to be fed, the others are not hungry. If lee is the last to lose, everyone else previously lost.. seems obvious to me!

NiallMcC wrote:Hehehe, such confusion !

Lee being the last to be beaten means everyone else was already beaten (ok, an untested hypothesis, but lee being the best one can assume he'd beat everyone).

I C. "Beaten" doesn't necessarily mean someone has actually played and lost, but also that someone may not have played, but if he did, he would lose. (since there are a lot of players, present and future, who haven't played against computer/alphago yet, but if they did they would lose)

Lee Sedol was the last human left standing in the battle against computer supremacy.