Whether an AI that plays StarCraft, DotA, or Overwatch succeeds or fails against top players, we'd have learned nothing from the outcome. Wins -- congrats, you've trained on enough data. Fails -- go back, train on 10x more games, add some bells & whistles to your setup, succeed.
-
-
I understand from a purist perspective, but is it wrong for them to double dip on a project that boosts PR when funding is a finite resource? Cancer research suffers from a similar problem where the deadliest strains are “less popular to fund” and don’t drum up PR.
-
However, funding for AI is not a zero sum game, and work like this can serve to increase the total pool rather than be thought of as “taking up funding that could’ve been better utilized”
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.