Strange7 comments on Thoughts on the Singularity Institute (SI) - Less Wrong

256 Post author: HoldenKarnofsky 11 May 2012 04:31AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (1270)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Strange7 22 March 2013 06:52:38AM 0 points [-]

I would think it would be possible to cut the space of possible chess positions down quite a bit by only retaining those which can result from moves the AI would make, and legal moves an opponent could make in response. That is, when it becomes clear that a position is unwinnable, backtrack, and don't keep full notes on why it's unwinnable.

Comment author: Polymeron 17 April 2013 07:26:44AM 1 point [-]

This is more or less what computers do today to win chess matches, but the space of possibilities explodes too fast; even the strongest computers can't really keep track of more than I think 13 or 14 moves ahead, even given a long time to think.

Merely storing all the positions that are unwinnable - regardless of why they are so - would require more matter than we have in the solar system. Not to mention the efficiency of running a DB search on that...

Comment author: CCC 17 April 2013 09:51:02AM *  3 points [-]

Not to mention the efficiency of running a DB search on that...

Actually, with proper design, that can be made very quick and easy. You don't need to store the positions; you just need to store the states (win:black, win:white, draw - two bits per state).

The trick is, you store each win/loss state in a memory address equal to the 34-byte (or however long) binary number that describes the position in question. Checking a given state is then simply a memory retrieval from a known address.

Comment author: Polymeron 23 April 2013 06:55:27PM 1 point [-]

I suspect that with memory on the order of 10^70 bytes, that might involve additional complications; but you're correct, normally this cancels out the complexity problem.

Comment author: wedrifid 17 April 2013 10:20:12AM 1 point [-]

Merely storing all the positions that are unwinnable - regardless of why they are so - would require more matter than we have in the solar system. Not to mention the efficiency of running a DB search on that...

The storage space problem is insurmountable. However searching that kind of database would be extremely efficient (if the designer isn't a moron). The search speed would have a lower bound of very close to (diameter of the sphere that can contain the database / c). Nothing more is required for search purposes than physically getting a signal to the relevant bit, and back, with only minor deviations from a straight line each way. And that is without even the most obvious optimisations.

If your chess opponent is willing to fly with you in a relativistic rocket and you only care about time elapsed from your own reference frame rather than the reference frame of the computer (or most anything else of note) you can even get down below that diameter / light speed limit, depending on your available fuel and the degree of accelleration you can survive.