Larks comments on Superintelligence Reading Group - Section 1: Past Developments and Present Capabilities - Less Wrong

25 Post author: KatjaGrace 16 September 2014 01:00AM

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

Comments (232)

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

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 16 September 2014 07:27:04PM 5 points [-]

For Civilization in particular, it seems very likely that AI would be wildly superhuman if it were subject to the same kind of attention as other games, simply because the techniques used in Go and Backgammon, together with a bunch of ad hoc logic for navigating the tech tree, should be able to get so much traction.

Agreed. It's not Civilization, but Starcraft is also partially observable and non-deterministic, and a team of students managed to bring their Starcraft AI to the level of being able to defeat a "top 16 in Europe"-level human player after only a "few months" of work.

The game AIs for popular strategy games are often bad because the developers don't actually have the time and resources to make a really good one, and it's not a high priority anyway - most people playing games like Civilization want an AI that they'll have fun defeating, not an AI that actually plays optimally.

Comment author: Larks 19 September 2014 12:58:06AM 5 points [-]

most people playing games like Civilization want an AI that they'll have fun defeating, not an AI that actually plays optimally.

The popular AI mods for Civ actually tend to make the AIs less thematic - they're less likely to be nice to you just because of a thousand year harmonious and profitable peace, for example, and more likely to build unattractive but efficient Stacks of Doom. Of course there are selection effects on who installs such mods.