Lin Yan traveled to a world without Go.
No one knows what kind of bottomless wisdom and pattern are hidden in the black and white game across the nineteen roads.
Lin Yan accidentally jumped to the front desk to become a god. He only used the anonymous ID "Xuan" and threw away the most basic rules in the forum.
At first, the entire Internet ridiculed: "Does the space-occupancy game played by children also deserve to be called chess?"
Later, life-or-death questions, fixed formulas, layouts, and mid-game tactics were released one after another, and all the players collectively broke through the defense: "Is there any end to the depth of this chess game?"
Later, professional chess players bowed their heads to become masters, and officials took the initiative to certify the game. Go craze broke out around the world, and the word "Xuanshi" became the spiritual totem in the hearts of all chess players.
Everyone is looking for the ancestor of chess, but no one thinks that the legend is hidden on the university campus.
Until the world's first Go AI "Apocalypse" was born, it defeated twelve of the top human players in a row, and it was said that the human game was vulnerable.
When the entire network was in despair, Lin Yan entered the arena under his real name and sat opposite AI.
Only then did the world know that the mysterious master they had looked up to for several years had never been a reclusive old man.
The true height of Go has only just begun to be measured from today on.
Reader comments
When I was in elementary school, I chose Go as a course in the school. I studied Go for three or four years, and then I stopped learning it when I entered junior high school. Now it's time for an internship in college. Reading the book really reminded me of the time when I first learned it when I was a child.
In fact, this kind of book is not popular. If you don't have some basic knowledge, you won't be able to experience the fun. For someone like me who has only learned the basics and hasn't practiced for a long time, reading this kind of book is very comfortable and gives me a feeling of reminiscing. I won't comment too much on the writing style. I'm purely rating it based on my own feelings, whether it's AI or shi. I have a filter in my eyes so I can't tell. The review I wrote last night was during emo time.
I want to talk about why Go is counterintuitive.
The rules of Go are nothing more than five:
1. Take turns.
2. Exhaust your energy.
3. Stay tight.
4. All identical items are prohibited.
5. The ending is empty.
Although, there is no consensus on the current Go rules for the above five points. For example, Ying's rules have no forbidden points. For example, Chinese rules and Japanese and Korean rules have different definitions of "empty". For example, the prohibition of all transactions is rarely strictly enforced. But overall it's pretty much the same.
However, there is a disconnect between the first four "rules of chess" and the last "rule of victory or defeat". Let's talk about chess. The victory or defeat is determined by capturing a specific chess piece, so there will be descriptions related to capturing pieces in the rules of chess. In flying chess, the victory or defeat is determined by moving to the end point, so there are movement-related descriptions in the rules of chess. However, the victory or defeat in Go is determined by going around and empty, but there is no related description of going around and empty in the rules of chess.
Therefore, in a world where Go has not been invented, the primary issue is not the layout theory or the theory of life and death, but how to understand this meta-question and how to understand why the underlying code of Go is so weird.
I personally feel that the depth of this issue is enough to write several papers. It's just that in our world, because Go has been invented long ago and habits have become natural, we have not thought deeply about this issue. But if I really want to think about this question, I don't think Ke Jie can answer it.
It's good, but I think it should be more entertaining. Otherwise, it all depends on computing power. After AI came out, there was no way to survive at all. Especially in today's society where AI has been directly developed, it will directly crush everything when it comes out.
That is, when playing chess, you should play the kind that has a certain degree of symmetry and is enjoyable to watch. Just like the ancient ones.
I'm curious about what the anchor will write next. It's unlikely that the protagonist's experience will last a lifetime. There must be some kind of real genius.
4 Stars is given because the setting is interesting and very good, but 1 star is deducted because the writing is really not that good. The author obviously feels that his writing skills are insufficient, but there is indeed improvement in the subsequent writing, which is a bit of a pity.
The idea is good, but the writing is not good
Creative, good ideas
ai article
It has a strong sense of immersion and is suitable for me who only knows the rules of Go.
I hope the author can write longer.
The subject matter has changed in a different direction [laughing evilly]
When I was in elementary school, I chose Go as a course in the school. I studied Go for three or four years, and then I stopped learning it when I entered junior high school. Now it's time for an internship in college. Reading the book really reminded me of the time when I first learned it when I was a child. In fact, this kind of book is not popular. If you don't have some basic knowledge, you won't be able to experience the fun. For someone like me who has only learned the basics and hasn't practiced for a long time, reading this kind of book is very comfortable and gives me a feeling of reminiscing. I won't comment too much on the writing style. I'm purely rating it based on my own feelings, whether it's AI or shi. I have a filter in my eyes so I can't tell. The review I wrote last night was during emo time.
I want to talk about why Go is counterintuitive. The rules of Go are nothing more than five: 1. Take turns. 2. Exhaust your energy. 3. Stay tight. 4. All identical items are prohibited. 5. The ending is empty. Although, there is no consensus on the current Go rules for the above five points. For example, Ying's rules have no forbidden points. For example, Chinese rules and Japanese and Korean rules have different definitions of "empty". For example, the prohibition of all transactions is rarely strictly enforced. But overall it's pretty much the same. However, there is a disconnect between the first four "rules of chess" and the last "rule of victory or defeat". Let's talk about chess. The victory or defeat is determined by capturing a specific chess piece, so there will be descriptions related to capturing pieces in the rules of chess. In flying chess, the victory or defeat is determined by moving to the end point, so there are movement-related descriptions in the rules of chess. However, the victory or defeat in Go is determined by going around and empty, but there is no related description of going around and empty in the rules of chess. Therefore, in a world where Go has not been invented, the primary issue is not the layout theory or the theory of life and death, but how to understand this meta-question and how to understand why the underlying code of Go is so weird. I personally feel that the depth of this issue is enough to write several papers. It's just that in our world, because Go has been invented long ago and habits have become natural, we have not thought deeply about this issue. But if I really want to think about this question, I don't think Ke Jie can answer it.
It's good, but I think it should be more entertaining. Otherwise, it all depends on computing power. After AI came out, there was no way to survive at all. Especially in today's society where AI has been directly developed, it will directly crush everything when it comes out. That is, when playing chess, you should play the kind that has a certain degree of symmetry and is enjoyable to watch. Just like the ancient ones.
I'm curious about what the anchor will write next. It's unlikely that the protagonist's experience will last a lifetime. There must be some kind of real genius.
4 Stars is given because the setting is interesting and very good, but 1 star is deducted because the writing is really not that good. The author obviously feels that his writing skills are insufficient, but there is indeed improvement in the subsequent writing, which is a bit of a pity.
The idea is good, but the writing is not good
Creative, good ideas ai article
It has a strong sense of immersion and is suitable for me who only knows the rules of Go.
I hope the author can write longer.
The subject matter has changed in a different direction [laughing evilly]
I haven't played Go for a long time.