Talk:1002: Game AIs

2016-01-27T13:13:41Z

162.158.152.173:

Mornington Crescent would be impossible for a computer to play, let alone win... {{unsigned|188.29.119.251}}
It is unclear which side of the line jeopard fall upon. Why so close to the line I wonder. [[User:DruidDriver|DruidDriver]] ([[User talk:DruidDriver|talk]]) 01:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

: Because of {{w|Watson (computer)}}. (Anon) 13 August 2013{{unsigned ip|24.142.134.100}}

Could the "CounterStrike" be referring instead to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-Strike computer game] which can have computer-controlled players? --[[Special:Contributions/131.187.75.20|131.187.75.20]] 15:49, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

:I agree, this is far more likely. [[Special:Contributions/100.40.49.22|100.40.49.22]] 10:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

On the old blog version of this article, a comment mentioned Ken tweeting his method right after this comic was posted. He joked that they would asphyxiate themselves to actually see heaven for seven minutes. I don't know how to search for tweets, or if they even save them after so much time, but I thought it should be noted. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.161|108.162.237.161]] 07:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

I disagree about the poker part. Reading someone's physical tells is just a small part of the game. Theoretically there is a Nash equilibrium for the game, the reason why it hasn't been found is that the amount of ways a deck can be shuffled is astronomical (even if you just count the cards that you use) and you also have to take into account the various betsizes. A near perfect solution for 2 player limit poker has been found by the Cepheus Poker Project: http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca/.

~ Could the description of tic-tac-toe link to xkcd 832 which explains the strategy? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.173|162.158.152.173]] 13:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1002: Game AIs