"Solving" Chess - Possible?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wasn't disagreeing with the 10^30 but your comment that equates to 1000 variations a second.
Ah, sorry. I must have thought it was 10^3 somehow.

I'd say anything which relies on brute forcing is a 'dumb' AI
I was using ultimately skilled to mean one that gives the determinable best move, and ultimately dumb to mean one that plays randomly. It wasn't meant to be a measure of how much I respect the AI's ability to play chess.

So yes, you're a little idealistic in your analysis.
The 10^30 wasn't my analysis.

Doing a "hard" solution of chess is still difficult, just due to the brute force computation required. But AIs capable of beating the best human chess players have already been developed - AI chess is considered "done" from a basic science point of view. The AI community has largely moved on to more difficult games (Jeopardy!, etc.).
Makes sense. I'll leave the problem with the Hard Problem of consciousness, then. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top