> But I dont know why people still consider chess to be a good measure of general intelligence. Its not. The newest bot learned how to be better than our centuries of chess knowledge in about 30 mins, but the robot isnt at all intelligent in any general sense.
That's not necessarily a valid counterargument. Humans and bots may play similarly to some extent (both technically do ranking&searching through space of possible moves, aided by many heuristics), but for humans it's about using the same "mental pathways" that are required by other tasks in life. Bots are just playing chess.
It's like benchmarking a CPU vs. an ASIC. ASIC will be better for the task it's designed for, but absolutely useless for everything else.
That's not necessarily a valid counterargument. Humans and bots may play similarly to some extent (both technically do ranking&searching through space of possible moves, aided by many heuristics), but for humans it's about using the same "mental pathways" that are required by other tasks in life. Bots are just playing chess.
It's like benchmarking a CPU vs. an ASIC. ASIC will be better for the task it's designed for, but absolutely useless for everything else.