It's not really a failure of computers. As far as I understand, the configurations are too complex and numerous to realistically bruteforce, and automatic methods aren't reliable enough (kind of like trying to automate long sequences in a TAS). Then again, for scientists this would be a very arduous task without a guaranteed outcome, while gamers do the same kind of thing enthusiastically, for free, and en masse. :)
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
I don't think this is a failure on anybody's part. This just purely shows the power of distributed computing, via Folding@Home and other similar services.
I don't think this is a failure on anybody's part. This just purely shows the power of distributed computing, via Folding@Home and other similar services.
Not exactly. Most distributed computing doesn't require any user input beyond signing your computer up as a node in the network. This is more demonstrating the power of teamwork. If your problem makes for an interesting puzzle (or you can make it into one), then there are large numbers of people out there who might be interested in taking a crack at it; give them access, and help them work together, and they can get a lot done.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Joined: 1/8/2011
Posts: 74
Location: Saturn Valley Medical Center
Very interesting article. I think the gamers were quick to solve the problem because gamers are open-minded toward solving problems and try every possibility possible before claiming the game to be impossible. Games such as LoZ have sometimes very complex and hard puzzles that can be very difficult to solve.
From trying to play this game now (and I already hate myself a lot for it), I feel like it's actually laziness to develop proper algorithms that has prevented computers from outperforming humans at these tasks. Of course I'm only at the beginner level and others have been playing it for over a year, so what do I know?
It's a very complex problem that requires extensive spatial reasoning, which is an area where AI / expert systems have yet to come close to catching up with human abilities. There are computer programs that try to solve these kinds of problems (c.f. Folding@Home) but from what I understand they're mostly "try each possible configuration until a working one is found", which, given the complex nature of the molecules in question, takes a very long time.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
DrSaturn wrote:
Very interesting article. I think the gamers were quick to solve the problem because gamers are open-minded toward solving problems and try every possibility possible before claiming the game to be impossible. Games such as LoZ have sometimes very complex and hard puzzles that can be very difficult to solve.
This is why I love TASing - it suggests puzzles invented by NO ONE, they aren't farfetched and demand a really creative approach.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
what kind of lard ass plays that game anyway?
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
moozooh wrote:
Yeah, needs more Kinect, imo. Not immersive enough as it is.
Exactly. How can we solve spatial problems with a 2d mouse?
But really, it's pretty much a stupid task that nobody wants to do, presented under the guise of a toy in order to captivate the shallow minds.
I herp my derp back and forth.
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
Exactly my thoughts. The lack of 3d controls makes it completely ridiculous and you'd have to be nothing short of a total idiot to keep "playing" this.
In other most exciting news, I only need [URL=http://www.abload.de/img/foldit_1316775754v2ti.png]7-8 more points[/URL] to make it into top 3 on the Copper Ion Binding Protein Beginner Puzzle!
