Quote from: eternalgloom on December 20, 2017, 02:11:00 PM

Quote from: stingers on December 19, 2017, 01:55:51 PM

Quote from: Hell-raiser on December 19, 2017, 10:03:17 AM

It seems that poker has finally fallen the next victim to insatiable and unstoppable AI, after chess and go world champions were defeated in the past. Poker seems to have been a more difficult problem for AI to solve than the games mentioned, primarily due to hidden information as well as bluffing, but now it's over for human beings. An AI developed by researchers was successful in defeating top professionals at No-limit Texas Hold’em, which is thought to be one of the most challenging types of poker. If anyone is interested who played for the mankind, the players were Jason Les, Dong Kim, Daniel McCauley and Jimmy Chou, though I'm not sure if these names are telling you anything.

Here're the links to the popular-science article and actual paper in Science magazine.

If this is really true and if this gets implemented on a larger scale and things get available to everyone easily, then the future of online gambling will surely be doomed.

However, poker is a form of gambling and how can anyone, be it how intelligent are they can beat someone in game of chance, maybe its just purely luck that the AI has beaten them, but in the longer run, AI cannot always beat the human brain neither can this be true vice-versa.

Your comment is just wrong on so many levels.

How will this change the future on online gambling? Maybe online poker, but to say that this has any impact on online gambling in general is just plain stupid.
Slots aren't impacted by this, roulette isn't, etc.

From the first article:

Quote

Over the course of a 20 day competition, with 120,000 poker hands played in total and a prize pool of $200,000, Libratus defeated top human pros

I doubt this is just luck if the bot played for 20 days against these pros.

Obviously, this is not luck since all moves played by all parties have been properly analyzed. I read across the second article and although I couldn't really understand half of it or even more, the authors specifically point it out that it wasn't luck, absolutely. Long story short, the AI managed to find weaknesses in playing patterns of its human opponents and used them to the full. When the players changed their approach, the AI changed its approach too, and it was always able to find an advantage and take it.