Fissure opens in chess AI scene [link]
post by Kevin · 2012-01-23T02:14:46.525Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 8 commentsContents
8 comments
http://boingboing.net/2012/01/19/fissure-opens-in-chess-ai-scen.html
8 comments
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by FAWS · 2012-01-23T02:45:33.246Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Are you posting this because it has the letters "AI" in the title?
Replies from: Kevin↑ comment by Kevin · 2012-01-23T04:02:50.131Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
It's a link that might be of interest to you, you have the power to decide whether or not it is interesting to you or if you want to read it.
Replies from: timtyler↑ comment by timtyler · 2012-01-23T11:31:02.998Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
It's usually best if you facilitate that process if posting links, by offering some kind of summary. Otherwise, lots of people will see the link, see that you haven't bothered to summarise it, determine that it is of low value to you, conclude that it probably won't be of value to them, and then move on - in which case you are just causing large-scale low-level irritation.
comment by gwern · 2012-01-23T19:09:27.572Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Riis's posts were a lot more interesting than that link. I commented
The graphs were dramatic. It's not often you can watch software quality shoot up, as measured by a key objective metric, after a community shift towards open source code and norms.
comment by Jayson_Virissimo · 2012-01-23T05:10:23.614Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
I personally found this article interesting, but the politics surrounding a particular kind of narrow AI seems a little off-topic for Less Wrong.
Replies from: Dan_Moorecomment by [deleted] · 2012-01-28T15:55:39.447Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
You do know we have open threads for random links and stuff, right?