Hacker News Reader

When people talk about solving a game like go or chess, they mean proving mathematically if there exists a way to guarantee a win, or if the second player can always guarantee a draw, among related questions. Current game engines have no such knowledge, they just pick statistically what the think the best move is and hope for the best.

View on HN

No, that is not what "people" in general mean, this is only what some people mean.

Other people know there is no solving go with calculating, but using statistics to achieve the goal of becoming better at humans. And they are. (With a recent unexpected exception unlikely to be repeated more often)

I don't think people "in general" refer to games as "solved" or "not solved" at all. Among people who do, chess and go are definitely not referred to as (fully) solved.

"to have a chance against intelligent humans. Until it was solved."

But this was the original statement - so solved references "chance against intelligent humans". And this is clearly solved. No comment on that there cannot be better go engines, but no matter how painful it is, they beat the best humans. (And it was painful, they did cry)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com