Recent advances in artificial intelligence made it possible for computers to defeat the top Go players in the world, a milestone that has been thought to be decades away. This has put the Go-World in front of a new challenge, as they must negotiate their position in relation to this automated program. To understand how communities, react to automatization this paper follows the commentaries of top Go professionals to understand how they experienced the success of AlphaGo, the program that today is the best player of Go worldwide. The paper finds three main themes that permeate through the material. Some professionals feel alienated by the introduction of this superhuman player but most players see the potential to elevate the quality of play throughout the community. Furthermore, in contrast to previous Go programs AlphaGo seems to be anthropomorphized by researchers and players due to its significant superhuman capabilities.
Table of Contents
1. Possibilities for our Grandchildren
2. A Case for Go
3. AlphaGo and the Deep Sea
3.1. The God of Go
3.2. Cooperation and Opportunity
3.3. Human and Machine
4. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper examines how communities respond to automation by analyzing the reactions of top Go professionals to the success of the artificial intelligence program AlphaGo. It explores the intersection of technological advancement, professional identity, and the cultural significance of the game, ultimately seeking to understand how human groups negotiate their position and reconcile with machines that surpass human capabilities.
- The impact of automation on professional identity and expertise.
- Emotional responses to the displacement of human skill by AI.
- The potential for human-machine cooperation and shared learning.
- The phenomenon of anthropomorphizing advanced AI systems.
- The role of cultural identity in the acceptance of new technology.
Excerpt from the Book
3.1. The God of Go
“To describe these past days of the week I’d use the word desperate” (CGTN, 2017). This was Ke Jie’s conclusion of his three to zero match at the Future of Go Summit. The title of the tournament made the crossroad at which the Go community found itself vividly clear. The future of Go is at play and Ke Jie’s first resume in an interview after the final game was skeptical: “I never doubted myself. I always felt I had everything under control. […] But to AlphaGo, its like ‘what is all this rubbish’ ”(CGTN, 2017). Understandably, humans who have dedicated their life to a certain task are stunned if a machine can do something better than what they have worked for decades. This can be an intense experience as Ben Lockhart, one of the top US amateur players, expressed: “I felt emotional and dizzy, and stepped outside for a minute” (Zastrow, 2016). Similarly, Lee Sedol himself stated “I am in shock, I admit that” (Zastrow, 2016). The deep connection to cultural and personal identity, combined with the shock and disbelief can lead to dismissal, helplessness or antipathy towards the machine that is replacing your work. Ke Jie expressed similar feeling after the game. “AlphaGo can see the whole universe of Weiqi [Go]. I can only see a small area around me. So please let me play in my own backyard. Similarly, Artem Kachanovskyi of the European Go Federation voiced concern after the second tournament including Lee Sedol:
To be honest, I'd prefer to practise against Lee Sedol. So far I don't really have any sympathies for computer go programs. Go is for humans. Playing against AlphaGo can be compared to playing football against a perfect robot. Might be interesting once or twice, but it is much more fun to play regularly against humans (Ouweleen 2016).
Summary of Chapters
1. Possibilities for our Grandchildren: This chapter introduces the societal context of technological progress, linking the discourse on automation to historical visions of a post-labor future.
2. A Case for Go: This chapter establishes Go as the specific case study, highlighting its cultural depth and the profound challenge AlphaGo’s success posed to human expertise.
3. AlphaGo and the Deep Sea: This chapter explores the multi-faceted reactions of the Go community to AlphaGo, ranging from alienation to an appreciation for its potential as a collaborative tool.
3.1. The God of Go: This section details the emotional impact on professional players, who experienced shock and disbelief as their long-standing expertise was suddenly surpassed by an algorithm.
3.2. Cooperation and Opportunity: This section discusses how the Go community shifted toward a constructive view, recognizing the machine as a unique catalyst for deeper learning and evolution within the game.
3.3. Human and Machine: This section analyzes the tendency to anthropomorphize AlphaGo, exploring how players and researchers attribute human qualities to the program to better navigate their interaction with it.
4. Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the findings, noting that while automation disrupts professional identity, it also offers opportunities for co-evolution between human communities and technology.
Keywords
AlphaGo, Artificial Intelligence, Go, Automation, Professional Identity, Human-Machine Interaction, Technology, Social Impact, Expertise, Digitalization, Anthropomorphism, Robotics, Cultural Identity, Innovation, Future of Work
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this work?
This paper examines how human communities react when their core professional and cultural activities are automated by advanced artificial intelligence, using the game of Go and the success of AlphaGo as a primary case study.
What are the central themes discussed in the book?
The core themes include the impact of superhuman AI on professional identity, the emotional response to technological disruption, the potential for collaborative learning between humans and machines, and the tendency to anthropomorphize AI agents.
What is the primary objective of the research?
The primary goal is to investigate the intersection of technological progress and human identity, specifically how groups like the Go community negotiate their relevance and adapt their practices in the face of machine superiority.
What scientific approach or methodology is applied?
The author follows a qualitative approach by analyzing commentaries, interviews, and statements from professional Go players and representatives of international Go organizations collected during various tournaments.
What is addressed in the main body of the paper?
The main body explores the historical and cultural significance of Go, the initial shock caused by AlphaGo's performance, the subsequent shift toward seeing the AI as an opportunity for development, and the human propensity to attribute lifelike qualities to the machine.
Which keywords best characterize this publication?
Key terms include AlphaGo, Artificial Intelligence, Professional Identity, Human-Machine Interaction, and the social/cultural dynamics of automation.
How does the Go community's reaction to AlphaGo compare to the oceanographers mentioned in the text?
Both groups initially faced challenges to their status quo due to new technology—ROVs for oceanographers and AlphaGo for Go players. In both cases, the central issue was not just technical efficiency, but the threat posed to their professional identity and the perceived quality of their human expertise.
Why is the concept of "anthropomorphization" significant in the context of AlphaGo?
Anthropomorphization is significant because players and researchers attributed human-like qualities to AlphaGo to make its superhuman capabilities more understandable and to bridge the gap between their own intuition and the machine's "alien" logic, effectively integrating the AI into a familiar, social-like framework.
- Quote paper
- M.A. Stefan Raß (Author), 2019, The God of Go. How Communities React to Automation in the Case of AlphaGo, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1001863
