Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- From: Jean-Yves.Moyen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:07:36 +0200
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, RobertSzefler wrote:
> Claudio Grondi wrote:
>
> > use a human for processing the input data than a computer (please
> > skip here from consideration any tasks where the computation algorithm
> > for processing of the input data is not exactly known, so it can't be
> > programmed to achieve same result as when the task is given to a
> > human).
>
> Your terms are unfair IMHO. The exact reason why humans are and will
> always be ahead of computers wrt computing power is that they are the
> first to solve problems not foreseen earlier. Once the algorithm is
> known and at least implementable on a Turing-type machine, then even if
> it's NP-complete or whatever hardness class, computers will solve them
> faster than us.
Not quite sure about that.
Typically, computers are quite good at tactics but not at strategy.
Even if it seems to be similar, playing chess and go is absolutely not the
same. Chess require (almost) only tactics and computers are very good at
it (even able to beat the best human players) while go require a lot of
strategy and computers sucks at it.
The same "check every possibility far enough" stuff is correct for chess
with enough computing power butnot for go (currenty) because there are
just so many possibility at every move. A human player can get a global
view of the board and quickly find the better place from a strategical
point of view (ever see go players looking at a game and saying after the
tenth or so move "Ah, playing 10x12 was an error, he should have played
11x12" ?)
Notice that both go and chess have a winning (non-loosing) strategy for
one player and that theoretically we could find it by exploring the whole
tree of possible moves (and use some kind of min-max algorithm). But in
both cases, we're unable to find this strategy (by human or computer
means) due to lack of computationnal power. However, chess is sufficiently
simple to be efficiently played by computers while go is not.
But I'm not completely sure this answer the OP's original question...
--
Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.
Adresse mail plus valide ŕ partir de septembre 2005.
Utiliser l'adresse de redirection permanente :
Jean-Yves.Moyen `at` ens-lyon.org
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- From: RobertSzefler
- Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- References:
- Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- From: Claudio Grondi
- Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- From: RobertSzefler
- Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- Prev by Date: Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- Next by Date: Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- Previous by thread: Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- Next by thread: Re: Which programmable task can be done faster by a human than by a computer?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
