Mathematics, AI and Chess

Shannon's number is an estimate of the possible number of games of chess, arrived at by the mathematician and engineer Claude Shannon (1916-2001). Shannon postulated an average of 1000 possible moves for one move by White followed by one move for Black. Then he postulated a typical length of a chess game of 40 moves, and came up with his very famous number, his very famous estimate: there are at least 10 to the 120th power possible different chess games. 

I think Shannon's number is complete garbage. I think it tells us little beyond the fact that Shannon and other mathematicians didn't know much about chess, and that few chess players know much about math. Otherwise, Shannon's number would never have become famous to begin with, and, chastened by so much derisive laughter, he would've headed back to the drawing board to try again. 

In some positions on the chess board, there are many possible moves. For White's first move, there are 20 possible moves: 16 by the Pawns and 4 by the Knights. 20 choices also for Black's first move. There are other position in which a player would have far move than 20 possible moves. For example, if a player had 3 Queens, 2 Bishops, 2 pawns and a lot of space.  

In other positions, a player has only 1 possible move: if his King is under attack and there is one 1 possible way to defend it. Or if there is only 1 possible move which would not expose his King to attack. And there are positions where only 2 moves could defend the King against attack. Or 3, or 4, and so forth.

Or, instead of threats to the King, the number of moves could be limited by his pieces being blocked by his opponent's pieces, or by his own pieces. 

How would one get an average number of moves out of all of these different kinds of positions? How many different positions are there with just 1 possible move? How many positions yield 50 or more possible moves? I have no idea. Not the faintest idea. Furthermore, I have yet to see anyone even asking this very basic kind of question when trying to determine the number of possible chess games. I'm not saying I'm the only person who's asked these questions. I'm saying that not enough people have been asking them insistently enough for the evidence of their existence to have come to my attention.

Okay, now, the number of moves in a game. Average it out at 40, like Shannon? That's ridiculous. Checkmate can happen after 2 moves, or 4 moves. It's not unheard of for checkmate to happen after 10 or 15 moves, or 20 or 30. Conversely, some games have gone on for hundreds of moves. Has anyone even attempted to calculate the number of ways in which a game could last for over 100 moves? Or the number of different ways in which a game could go on, limited by the rule that one player can claim a draw if 50 moves go by during which neither player captures and piece or moves a Pawn? Did you notice that I said that a player CAN claim a draw under those conditions? We may have to make such draws mandatory and automatic if we wish to make the number of different games finite -- or perhaps not, I'm not competent to say.

These are just a few examples of the different numbers which would need to be calculated before one could attempt to combine them all and come up with any sort of reasonable estimate of the number of possible chess games.

I don't believe that AI is here. I haven't seen a product designed by AI which wasn't hideously ugly, haven't read a poem written by AI which wasn't ridiculous, haven't interacted with a search engine or automated call center which wasn't infuriatingly stupid. 

And I haven't seen an impressive attempt yet to estimate the number of possible games of chess, let alone solve the game by coming up with the moves which will always win, or always draw against perfect moves by the opponent, the way that checkers has just recently been solved. And when those things finally do happen, which they will if we don't kill ourselves off first, it being ultimately just a matter of crunching very, very big numbers, actual human-like communication and creativity will still be far off, or, perhaps, ultimately inaccessible to mathematics.

Buy books about AI and chess on Amazon: https://amzn.to/4jaiCKx

Miscellaneous

A BETTER NAME FOR AI: Rapid stupidity, because it does things no intelligent human would ever do, but much faster.

Around 1980, in a book which I had checked out of a public library, which had been written by Caroline Coon and published in 1977, entitled 1988: The New Wave Punk Rock Explosion, I read, apparently from the author's personal impressions of John Lydon, that at age 20, his favorite insult of anyone over age 16 was, "You're too old," and -- from memory! and probably, therefore, inaccurate! -- that although married, he said, "Love is something that you feel for a kitten. If you feel it for another human being, it just shows that your brain isn't working properly." And I said to myself, "AAAAAAAAGGGHHHH!!! I knew it! I knew Johnny Rotten was alright!  HE LOVES KITTIES!!!! squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" *thud*

 

I've already said it more than once on this blog, but it bears repeating: I'm not going along with this blanket condemnation of billionaires. Maybe most of them are poisonous reptiles, but we won't know unless we examine each of them as individuals, just the same as we do with any other group, unless we're prejudiced, because that is the definition of prejudice. Furthermore, more and more I have the impression that most of these yahoos spouting blanket condemnations of all billionaires -- are millionaires. They tend not to have the look of the vagabond, as that hair stylist in Down and Out in Beverly Hills said of the homeless. I don't see thrift-store clothes or homemade haircuts on these denouncers of billionaires, and I get a definite sense of private colleges and homes in stylish neighborhoods and $10 coffees and so forth. In short, they profess to be critical of capitalism while having themselves greatly benefited from it, but they focus on the size of a person's stack -- while possessing large stacks. ENORMOUS stacks from the perspective of the great majority of people on Earth.

It's NOT the size of your stack, it's what you're DOING with it! And if you're dissing all billionaires instead of focusing on specific acts by specific billionaires -- you're not doing much with your stack! I'm unimpressed! Also, if you succeed in stirring up enmity based on the size of a person's stack, and your own stack looks huge to most people on Earth -- that could really come back and bite you on the ass, you tedious and yet also horrible moron!

A month ago I got a shot of cortisone in my right shoulder, which had been very painful, and from that time until now, my right shoulder has been COMPLETELY pain-free! I'm 62 years old! This is the first time in years ANY of my joints has been pain-free! Steroids are amazing (cortisone is a steroid. I had one dose of it a month ago, administered by an MD. I favor the medically-responsible use of steroids, not the daily massive abuse which kills and maims for the sake of more frequent wight training)!

Be Very Afraid: We Are Already At the Mercy Of AI

If, that is, AI has any mercy at all.

You want proof? Here's proof, from today, that AI is already far ahead of us. Today, a computer, a machine, made this translation from Croatian to English:

"One famous German Der Spiegel told me quite a long week Commons Balkans. Now as to what would be the message, my loved ones, but that they do not they are willing to share with his neighbor: :: it's barely 48 hours later I was already contacted me for the first time the German and in the office of Der Spiegel and The expansion the muscle dijasporski Croat need to be trained to Croatia, with the part of the Balkans is no exception. No matter what the LOST theme incidentally designating the view that because of lot of problems sofisticiranijim Croatia in one direction or carrots just as some dismay that I express Croatian-German author solidarnom poured out of the Balkans in the case that the symbolic true meaning of its ( of course it is much harder to define). I'm trying here to read this e-mail, and remember how to describe them: Chestnut Scallion in one hand and a cigarette in the other pocket ... and a piece of lamb. Of course Mitteleuropa uljudjeni. Since writing this I agreed that Croatia Mitteleuropa, so he used the Latin Congress. , But today, as some Congress are pretty stupid. And I decide to check Jurich pavicic. He says that a Jurica jugonostalgičar. I just got a beautiful smile. Chestnuts, now song dedicated to him."

Now there's absolutely no way that a human could have done that!

Just keep this in mind:

Trump threatened the results if they will feel bad with the Republican and the GOP Obamacare and then clear the host Senators, senator. (News flash: Republicans are set to replace the current laws.)

What effect? The question I wonder if the Republicans smart. Rating trumpet sound, and 37% declines. According to the survey, only 3% of the voting sorry for him. I think it can look too much force. This is equally great, and how you and the people who complain they voted in 2016 to establish a presidential election Frank J. Garrod, Cicero, or someone else, for Hilary did not vote? More than 110 million votes to vote to vote 4,489,221 Cicero, Stein elected 1,457,216, and 1,884,459 elected Trump, Hillary, Frank J. Wilstach and general. This is the 117,830,896, than those who did not vote for Trump or on behalf of Hilary 's. What is your opinion of Trump? Do you vote for the future? Perhaps something could be missed, but it can not hurt the Republican Democrats, especially bad news near the end of Trump number of Republicans invent. Feel my skills, donkey donkey donkey donkey!

Why Have There Been So Many Stories About The Danger Of AI Wiping Out Or Enslaving Humanity? Ultron! Of Course!

Why are so many people suddenly worried about artificial intelligence wiping out humanity? Why are so many scientists -- mostly dingbats, but also including a few you'd think would know better -- warning about this supposed danger?

It's because Avengers: Age of Ultron -- #5 all-time in worldwide box-office -- was released last spring, and its plot features a sentient robot who thinks he must destroy humanity on order to save Earth, who can only be stopped by the combined efforts of all of Earth's superheroes.

That's where this bizarre fear of AI has been coming from.

I love it when something suddenly makes sense.

This makes sense inasmuch as I now see where where all the fear of AI is coming from. That fear itself is still as nonsensical as it always was. There are all sorts of ways humanity could wipe itself out -- pollution, nukes, etc -- but we're not going to create evil (and/or misguided and/or they have a point) super-intelligent machines which will do it for us. That's just silly.

(I'm not dissing the movie, I'm sure I'm going to like it a lot. I don't have to buy a sc-fi movie's premise in order to enjoy it.)