Wow! #
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 16:40 GMT
'clever as kids' - shouldn't be too hard these days...
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 16:40 GMT
It is strictly impossible to loose a tic-tac-toe game to ANY oponent when you play first. I'm taking on these smartypant 'cules any day. AAAHHHRRR!
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 16:40 GMT
'clever as kids' - shouldn't be too hard these days...
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 16:40 GMT
Oh great, molecules as intelligent as (some) children. If the "some" are the mini-yobbo-terrorists that roam the streets safe in the knowledge they are legally untouchable, it's the end of the world as we know it.
But if not, can I get an injection of this stuff please, it might boost my maths skills and I could even beat the sprogs at O-X-O for once...
Penguin? I like penguins
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 18:11 GMT
Rise of the Chemicals?
I for one welcome our bonding (chemically) overlords!
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 18:11 GMT
Actually, it is not impossible to loose tic-tac-toe when you start, it may be fairly difficult to loose, but it is possible.
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 18:11 GMT
Ooo... like the augments in Deus Ex?
Mine's the black leather with the sniper rifle...
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 18:11 GMT
Unless the starting player makes a mistake. Strictly speaking, it's impossible to win tic-tac-toe at all unless a player makes a mistake.
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 18:13 GMT
It's *always* possible to force a draw, whether you move first or second. Winning depends on particularly inept play by your opponent.
I thought everyone knew this, even Paris Hilton?
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 18:21 GMT
I think lose should be spelled with one oh, to distinguish it from that other common word loose. I may be democratically outvoted here but I think the dictionary still has the casting vote.
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 19:21 GMT
When will we see our cellphone implants?
Posted Thursday 21st August 2008 20:58 GMT
Surly the only winning move is not to play ?
Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess ?
WarGames? Never heard of it, why ?
Posted Friday 22nd August 2008 09:30 GMT
I had a program for my old TI-58 calculator (25 years ago) to allow it to play noughts and crosses. I deliberately programmed in one way to beat it, otherwise it would have been invincible. Nice to see the supermolecules are catching up.
Posted Friday 22nd August 2008 09:30 GMT
ok, I guess we are talking about the logic computation only, not actually playing tictactoe, yet then.
so Im not sure its such an achievment, as any switch system can do this if ordered correctly, wow intelligent glass marbles beat kids at tictactoe.. (thats a marble computer if your wondering)
Posted Friday 22nd August 2008 11:59 GMT
Why are they comparing this to children? It's just a computer so it can't do anything it's not programmed to do. So if it's programmed to win at a game it will always win unless the game is not winnable.
Should they not be comparing this to other logic processors? like how many calculations per second can it perform...
Posted Friday 22nd August 2008 11:59 GMT
Will AMD or Intel be the first to employ this tech in future processors? ;)
Posted Friday 22nd August 2008 15:25 GMT
Loose is gonna get my vote any day.
Paris needs no introduction here.
Posted Saturday 23rd August 2008 04:01 GMT
So do these molecules cry at bedtime, and sneakily blame the "accident" on their siblings?
Posted Saturday 23rd August 2008 08:02 GMT
You're right, it's impossible to loose if you play second too, but it's then much more difficult to win (weak. I know).
Posted Sunday 24th August 2008 09:58 GMT
Next up: nano-Eliza. Then everyone can have a real, invisible friend.