 |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Chris Hurst
Joined: 27 Jul 2007
Posts: 569
Location: United States, California,
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| joseph hollinger wrote: | | Chris Hurst wrote: | | Would you bet on a computer against Senna in his prime? Do you think Bobby Fischer would lose in a chess game to a computer? |
Absolutely I would. The technology to out-drive Senna may not be there right now, but its certainly not far off. And human grandmasters losing to computers is old news.
| Chris Hurst wrote: |
Take Senna and put him in the environment most humans use their automobiles in: driving to and from work. Do you really think a computer can drive in traffic better than Ayrton Senna could? Furthermore do you have to be Ayrton Senna to drive better than a computer in traffic? I don't think so. |
Nothing I've ever seen or heard about Senna would make me believe he would be any better than the rest of us on the commute to and from work.
| Chris Hurst wrote: |
"By estimation, the brain has about 100 million MIPS worth of processing power while recent super-computers only has a few million MIPS worth in processor speed. That said, the brain is still the winner in the race. Because of the cost, enthusiasm and efforts still required, computer technology has still some length to go before it will match the human brain's processing power."
Source: http://library.thinkquest.org/C001501/the_saga/compare.htm
|
I assume you also read the earlier paragraph that states:
| Quote: |
1999's fastest PC processor chip on the market was a 700 MHz pentium that did 4200 MIPS. By simple calculation, we can see that we would need at least 24,000 of these processors in a system to match up to the total speed of the brain !!
|
Well, it's 2012 and the world's fastest super computer includes over 1.5 million pentium type cores. Time moves on. |
Was in a rush when I posted the figures about processing power and didn't read through the entire thing. Did some reading about the human vs computer chess matches and found:
In October 2004, Ruslan Ponomariov, Veselin Topalov and Sergey Karjakin played against computers Hydra, Fritz 8, and Deep Junior. Ponomariov and Topalov were FIDE world chess champions. Sergey Karjakin at 12 was the youngest Grandmaster. The computers won 8.5 to 3.5. The humans won one game, Karjakin, the youngest and lowest rated player, defeated Deep Junior
It's not impossible. Later in 2009:
Pocket Fritz 4 (2009)
In 2009 a chess engine running on slower hardware, a 528MHz HTC Touch HD mobile phone, reached the grandmaster level. The mobile phone won a category 6 tournament with a performance rating 2898. The chess engine Hiarcs 13 runs inside Pocket Fritz 4 on the mobile phone HTC Touch HD. Pocket Fritz 4 won the Copa Mercosur tournament in Buenos Aires, Argentina with 9 wins and 1 draw on August 4–14, 2009.[29] Pocket Fritz 4 searches fewer than 20,000 positions per second. This is in contrast to supercomputers such as Deep Blue that searched 200 million positions per second. Pocket Fritz 4’s higher performance comes from being smarter and not from faster computers.
Pocket Fritz 3 using version 12.1 of Hiarcs had won the same event the previous year with six wins and four draws, running on a 624MHz iPaq hx2790.
People are able to match the processing power currently. So as it related to the original topic I started, would you trust yourself or a machine to drive you to work?
Last edited by Chris Hurst on Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Chris Hurst
Joined: 27 Jul 2007
Posts: 569
Location: United States, California,
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Benn Herr wrote: | Self-driving cars only concern me from the aspect of how people might use them. Will it get to the point where you load the kids in the car and send them to Grandma’s house? To school? To soccer practice? No adult, no responsible party, just show the kid how to input the return destination when it’s time to come home. Who is the responsible driver then? Can I stop off at the liquor store, pick up a twelve pack and start my evening on the way home? I’m not driving, the car is! Long drive across the desert coming home from the races? Just set the “cruise control” and jump in the back to catch some shut-eye.
I don’t think we really want any of those situations, but you know it’ll happen.
And what would be more fun than stealing a car, set it on auto drive, and then climb out the window into your buddies’ car. Although it would be pretty cool to have your stolen car do the “Bait Car” deal and drive them to the Police station!
I don’t mind the driver assist functions that are useful (ABS and the like). I hate the nanny state devices like seat belt buzzers and 85 mph speedometers. I consider it my job/duty to figure out how to use them to my best advantage.
Know your machine, use your machine.
P.S. It's a joke, but they are thinking about it!
http://www.wimp.com/levitatingcar/ |
Right and what happens when one fails and someone is killed? Does anyone on this forum trust these things will perform with 100% accuracy and 0% error 100% of the time?
There is still no information as far as I've seen about how a pack of these will react when 1 or a few experience something like a blowout. How closely will these machines follow each other and given following at a specified distance how many people will then have access to the road ways?
How do these cars move from the left lane to the right lane to exit the freeway at speed without experiencing a shock wave traffic jam effect?
Given the volume of traffic on the road (2,499,764 registered vehicles in Los Angeles alone according to LADOT) how do you avoid a shockwave effect during peak traffic hours.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13402-shockwave-traffic-jam-recreated-for-first-time.html
As of right now there isn't a sufficient amount of information about the practice of autonomous vehicles to make me feel safe signing them up for action. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joseph hollinger
Joined: 12 Sep 2002
Posts: 9468
Location: United States, California, san francisco
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris Hurst wrote: |
People are able to match the processing power currently. So as it related to the original topic I started, would you trust yourself or a machine to drive you to work? |
Chris, I'm not sure if you appreciate what you've quoted. What they are saying is that current (or recent) generation smartphones are more likely than not to beat grandmasters at chess. Smartphones. That should be astounding. After all, the processor in a smartphone isn't designed to be fast--its designed to maximize battery life and not set your pocket on fire (which a pentium would absolutely do as it drained your battery in five minutes).
You still think that Bobby Fischer could beat a super computer (which would have the processing power of millions (maybe billions) of smartphones? Think about it.
_________________
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. -- Winston Churchill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Hurst
Joined: 27 Jul 2007
Posts: 569
Location: United States, California,
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| joseph hollinger wrote: | | Chris Hurst wrote: |
People are able to match the processing power currently. So as it related to the original topic I started, would you trust yourself or a machine to drive you to work? |
Chris, I'm not sure if you appreciate what you've quoted. What they are saying is that current (or recent) generation smartphones are more likely than not to beat grandmasters at chess. Smartphones. That should be astounding. After all, the processor in a smartphone isn't designed to be fast--its designed to maximize battery life and not set your pocket on fire (which a pentium would absolutely do as it drained your battery in five minutes).
You still think that Bobby Fischer could beat a super computer (which would have the processing power of millions (maybe billions) of smartphones? Think about it. |
It is astounding no question. I think it's possible that someone could beat a super computer in chess. Likely not, but it is not outside of the realm of possibilities. I certainly think we are capable of driving to work as well as a super computer can and I definitely think we can race as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joe Palmer
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 151
Location: United States, Florida, St. Augustine
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps as humans we lack the ability to process concerns that are too far into the future. Examples of which are, why most people aren't worried about global warming, or oil running out, or fresh water becoming extremely scarce. These are major issues for approximately 30-50 years from now, and we don't have the capacity (most of us anyway) to understand we need to do something now. Ok, another analogy is. It's why most of us wait to begin eating better until we're already FAT or SICK. Then "It's on a Diet we go"!
As Mr. hollinger points out. The processing power of computers from the 1970s were woefully outmatched by computers from the 1980s, and the 1990s outmatched the 1980s. Its important to remember that the gains in computing power aren't linear, they're exponential. Every decade the gains are greater and greater. So look at say 1960, and think about the technology available then. Then compare that technology to 2012. Big difference right? Well, when you compare 2012 to 2062 the difference will be even greater than when comparing 1960 & 2012. This is called Moore's theory or principle.
Fully autonomous cars are really just Robots. Do the research, and you'll fine out that there are some very significate people investing in the future of consumer robotics. Robots will be doing all kinds of chores for us, and one of those chores will probably be Driving for us in some capacity. Yes, they will be better at negoitiating morning rush hour than Ayrton Senna! We were told that we would have Flying cars someday. Well, I don't know about "Flying Cars", but fully autonomous cars are coming. They'll be hear before you know it, just another 30 years or so! 
The BEST of the BEST Tool & Die Makers, and Machinist can't match the most powerful CNC Machining & Turning Centers. Anywhere computers and Robots have been introduced, they out perform human counterparts.
As I said before, Racing will continue to select what new technologies are in the best interest of the sport. Remember, computers allow us to get on EKN and discuss this stupid crap. What a time suck this is!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joseph hollinger
Joined: 12 Sep 2002
Posts: 9468
Location: United States, California, san francisco
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris Hurst wrote: |
It is astounding no question. I think it's possible that someone could beat a super computer in chess. Likely not, but it is not outside of the realm of possibilities. I certainly think we are capable of driving to work as well as a super computer can and I definitely think we can race as well. |
Folks used to go on and on about computers not being able to beat even masters level chess players. Computers got better and better and finally, Deep Blue beat the world's best player. That was fifteen years ago. Since then computers have become much, much faster and chess playing programs have gotten much more sophisticated. It's highly unlikely at this point that any player, past or present could match a supercomputer.
_________________
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. -- Winston Churchill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Hurst
Joined: 27 Jul 2007
Posts: 569
Location: United States, California,
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joe Palmer wrote: | Perhaps as humans we lack the ability to process concerns that are too far into the future. Examples of which are, why most people aren't worried about global warming, or oil running out, or fresh water becoming extremely scarce. These are major issues for approximately 30-50 years from now, and we don't have the capacity (most of us anyway) to understand we need to do something now. Ok, another analogy is. It's why most of us wait to begin eating better until we're already FAT or SICK. Then "It's on a Diet we go"!
As Mr. hollinger points out. The processing power of computers from the 1970s were woefully outmatched by computers from the 1980s, and the 1990s outmatched the 1980s. Its important to remember that the gains in computing power aren't linear, they're exponential. Every decade the gains are greater and greater. So look at say 1960, and think about the technology available then. Then compare that technology to 2012. Big difference right? Well, when you compare 2012 to 2062 the difference will be even greater than when comparing 1960 & 2012. This is called Moore's theory or principle.
Fully autonomous cars are really just Robots. Do the research, and you'll fine out that there are some very significate people investing in the future of consumer robotics. Robots will be doing all kinds of chores for us, and one of those chores will probably be Driving for us in some capacity. Yes, they will be better at negoitiating morning rush hour than Ayrton Senna! We were told that we would have Flying cars someday. Well, I don't know about "Flying Cars", but fully autonomous cars are coming. They'll be hear before you know it, just another 30 years or so!
The BEST of the BEST Tool & Die Makers, and Machinist can't match the most powerful CNC Machining & Turning Centers. Anywhere computers and Robots have been introduced, they out perform human counterparts.
As I said before, Racing will continue to select what new technologies are in the best interest of the sport. Remember, computers allow us to get on EKN and discuss this stupid crap. What a time suck this is!!! |
I like discussing things like this with people because it allows me to see from other points of view and learn things I didn't know before. Wouldn't consider learning a time suck. Tim and some of the other guys gave me a lot of interesting things to go and read up on and I've learned a lot since starting this thread.
Moore's principle is opposite to what the inventor of the microprocessor has stated about his research of processors approaching their maximum in terms of speed. I posted the video earlier if you feel like watching it.
We'll just have to wait and see what happens I suppose. As far as global warming is concerned, I'm sure the British won't be complaining.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joseph hollinger
Joined: 12 Sep 2002
Posts: 9468
Location: United States, California, san francisco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Hurst
Joined: 27 Jul 2007
Posts: 569
Location: United States, California,
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
So who would win in a battle between skilled human and a wheeled robot imitator? Humans, of course. But only by a few measly seconds.
"What the human drivers do is consistently feel out the limits of the car and push it just a little bit farther," explained Gerdes. "When you look at what the car is capable of and what humans achieve, that gap is really actually small."
HUMANS: 1
Skynet: 0
I'll take my measly seconds and be on my way thank you. To those who endorsed Skynet I will PM you my address of where to send your losing bids  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joseph hollinger
Joined: 12 Sep 2002
Posts: 9468
Location: United States, California, san francisco
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chris,
I don't know if you've ever been to Thunderhill but I've raced there a lot. Every time I've been there the delta between poll and the slower drivers is a lot more than a few seconds. If they were actually able to get that car within a few seconds of a pro driver, then I'd say that they are already faster than most human drivers. And they are just getting going with this.
_________________
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. -- Winston Churchill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Go Top
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Login to check your private messages
Login
