I appreciate the no-nonsense answers from the man in the jacket, not just the point he made about the brexit campaign but also making sure to note that No-Limit poker is still yet to be cracked. I may also add, for those that are unaware, that player poker 'Heads Up' with two players is extremely uncommon with most games consisting of 9 players at the table. This coupled with the No-Limit rules and the lack of available information on holdings makes it continually one of the greatest challenges (game wise) for AI to overcome.
some people on the audience are just... well how do I put it... rude. the purpose of the question part of a talk is to ask questions, not to show off because you like to hear yourself talk...
Many thanks, been searching for "betfair live football" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Have you heard people talk about - Ziyonnor Meyameron Cure - (should be on google have a look ) ? Ive heard some interesting things about it and my mate got great success with it.
xBris what i hate is when people take the opportunity to reply to others comments without actually adding to the conversation, or don't give examples, such as
Or to realize that for the casino is a zero gamble ; just a percentage system. and that therefore it isnt a gamble for you either it is a percentage loss
@@GeldorfMcleod i like your comment. that 85% payout of a Slot machine when we play makes us think that it's all just our luck vs machine ,, but we don't even think of it as an Opposing Person who guarantees 15% profit for themselves and that they are the ones who setup that same machine. Weird how if we profit at a slot machine, then we think of ourselves as magically luckier than all these other "losers" ,, but we never think of ourselves as playing against the Casino and that we are the "losers" and they are the "winners" when we are losing our bets.
Why do you think a math guy knows anything about investing? If he did and what he knew worked, do you think he would still be a math guy? If you want to know the real answer to that question, it is very simple: neither investing oneself nor asking someone to invest for you makes any difference. The reason is the the people selling you or your proxy the assets are in it for business. A well run business don't lose money. Therefore, if you buy assets from them directly or indirectly, you can be sure they will make money and that money will be coming from you.
Regarding the first question about investing in the stock market, there are algorithms out there that could predict the trends of various markets in the global financial market. Therefore, long term successful investing has more to do with skills than luck.
The better question about whether playing the stock market is a factor of luck or skill is whether or not it means we should regulate it as a form of gambling.
Yes. Interesting. I listened a few times and was unable to decipher the whispered content. There must be people trained to do exactly this. Would spectral analysis help?
maybe it's some kind of secret message which comes as an audio engineer's error in disguise... seperateing normal youtube viewers from curious geniuses who process the audio and solve the riddle to then be hired by a secret society of ultra rich people searching for the creme de la creme to offer them a job.... or maybe it's just an error.
Just went out to buy lottery tickets after listening to the lecture and while still listening to this Q&A, bought 10 tickets 4 lines on each so that's 40 chances to potentially win big, the game is you choose 10 numbers out of 80. I've spent , won back lol I don't know what I've learned🤣I did win €10k in the same lottery two years ago to be fair (guesses right 8 numbers out of 10 winning numbers), so it is possible to win. Calculating anything at least in the lottery I'm not sure about that at all thou.
@@Riptions It's actually very easy if you have self discipline. Baccarat only has a slightly greater than 1% edge for the house. If you can't figure out how to beat that you shouldn't gamble.
I have a system in 6/55 lotto. I won 180 times the 4 numbers and the 3 numbers a lot of times in a span of 4 years. I bet 300 combinations every draw. Do I have an edge? Is that something or worthless?
yep...I sense a great deal of unease. i think he's out of his element elaborating on the practicalities of his book's findings in everyday life. i suspect he's undoubtedly fine with his book as a project of intellectual pursuit. but he seems lost in conveying any real wisdom his book has offer. and it wouldn't be surprising if he's a bit intimidated and probably suffering from a good bit of impostor syndrome (which can happen even to experts).
Jay Bingham agreed. And to see his facial expressions and stress reflexes during the presentation proves your point. Maybe good with books and equations. Definitely awkward socially.
AI is in fact a low-end or hardware type of Intelligence (that of I/O) and different from intelligence that requires logic. When we trip, we react to balance. We crawl, we sit, we stand and we learn to walk. We ride bicycles and we drive cars. Our bodies process a vast amount of I/O data while performing these tasks and most interestingly we actually acquire them. Biologically this is what AI is!
The 350 Million figure on the bus wasn't a lie it was the gross figure we send to the EU each week. It could be seen as misleading to suggest that we can send all this money to the NHS, however the real figure we give to the EU each week and never see again is 220m of uk taxpayers money giving away when the nhs is short of funds. Get your facts right before you spout your remainer agenda.
AlphaGo still can't even beat human chess AIs (stockfish) under standard chess rules, they played under different rules designed to help AlphaGo. Secondly, even if AlphaGo could reliably defeat every other chess AI, it wouldn't mean chess was solved. It would have to be literally impossible to beat (even by an omniscient being) for chess to be solved.
Hi, I trust you are not a millionaire seeing as you are here answering a q&a, my question is, with all the knowledge you shared, why are you not a millionaire?
Shaun Connolly he has prolly some stupid inane desire to do good in the world instead, like putting talents towards a pointless day job like working towards eliminating/mitigating effects from communicable diseases...what a charlatan!
How do you know he isn't a millionaire? A million bucks is not a lot nowadays. Lots of millionaires and even billionaires gives interviews and q&a for free.
Sorry to disappoint you, but yes it can... www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/30/libratus-poker-artificial-intelligence-professional-human-players-competition
Deeper NL and PL 3+ player games are still fairly well insulated from computers though. The question at around 3:30 gets at some of the hairier issues bots will have there. Basically, in 3+ player games, Nash strategies can lose to strategies which deviate from Nash and, essentially 'collude' against the Nash player. The 'collusion' in this sense can occur either intentionally or unintentionally, willfully or against the will of (and to the detriment of) one of the non-Nash players.
I'm nothing near an academic and I can't recommend any academic resources to you, but there's a short chapter on the topic in Chen and Ankenman's "Mathematics of Poker." The book's one of three poker books I'd consider not to be fluff and is worth a read if you're interested in poker/applied game theory in general. For poker specifically there are multiway solvers out there too, and you can toy around with some actual poker scenarios if you buy one of those (solve for the 3way nash, then set one strat to fixed non-nash and one to fixed nash, and solve the final strat for max exploit to see the aforementioned effects), but the solvers themselves aren't cheap and you'll need a quality lab computer to look at anything meaningful. Most people that are using the solvers for real work need a machine with at least 256gb ram (yes, I'm sure I mean ram).
More waste of time. If science could give an edge to gamblers, casinos around the world would have gone out of business, instead of sprawling and flourishing.
I don't know if you've seen the entire thing, but he does mention (either here, or in the lecture he gave) that casinos find out about these things, and then try to counter them, using various methods to make sure that the gamblers don't have an edge over the casino.
Majed Al Shamsi Gamblers do get an edge pretty frequently. Its called 'running good' or 'getting lucky'. But it has nothing to do with math and it is always temporary. The trick is to get the hell out of the casino once the winning streak is over.
No, a "good run" is not the same as having an edge. And your "trick" does nothing to affect your chances. Lucky for the casinos 99% of gamblers are not geniuses or card counters, and the ones who are they can find and ban before they lose too much money.
I appreciate the no-nonsense answers from the man in the jacket, not just the point he made about the brexit campaign but also making sure to note that No-Limit poker is still yet to be cracked. I may also add, for those that are unaware, that player poker 'Heads Up' with two players is extremely uncommon with most games consisting of 9 players at the table. This coupled with the No-Limit rules and the lack of available information on holdings makes it continually one of the greatest challenges (game wise) for AI to overcome.
some people on the audience are just... well how do I put it... rude. the purpose of the question part of a talk is to ask questions, not to show off because you like to hear yourself talk...
Thats right @xBris its the purpose of the comment section on youtube to show off because you like to hear yourself talk (see yourself in print)
Unfortunately its a product of Oxbridge education. Often academic brilliance but lacking social skills.
Many thanks, been searching for "betfair live football" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Have you heard people talk about - Ziyonnor Meyameron Cure - (should be on google have a look ) ? Ive heard some interesting things about it and my mate got great success with it.
xBris what i hate is when people take the opportunity to reply to others comments without actually adding to the conversation, or don't give examples, such as
The only "safe" way to gamble (with money) is to have so much of it that it really doesn't matter if you win or lose.
Or to realize that for the casino is a zero gamble ; just a percentage system. and that therefore it isnt a gamble for you either it is a percentage loss
@@GeldorfMcleod i like your comment. that 85% payout of a Slot machine when we play makes us think that it's all just our luck vs machine ,, but we don't even think of it as an Opposing Person who guarantees 15% profit for themselves and that they are the ones who setup that same machine. Weird how if we profit at a slot machine, then we think of ourselves as magically luckier than all these other "losers" ,, but we never think of ourselves as playing against the Casino and that we are the "losers" and they are the "winners" when we are losing our bets.
Thank you that great presentation
@0:15 Best none answer ever
Why do you think a math guy knows anything about investing? If he did and what he knew worked, do you think he would still be a math guy? If you want to know the real answer to that question, it is very simple: neither investing oneself nor asking someone to invest for you makes any difference. The reason is the the people selling you or your proxy the assets are in it for business. A well run business don't lose money. Therefore, if you buy assets from them directly or indirectly, you can be sure they will make money and that money will be coming from you.
He'd maybe still be the math guy as he loves math. You don't know other people's ambitions and life decisions.
A lot of really great questions here
1:27 that kid there seems to be enjoying himself
Regarding the first question about investing in the stock market, there are algorithms out there that could predict the trends of various markets in the global financial market. Therefore, long term successful investing has more to do with skills than luck.
The better question about whether playing the stock market is a factor of luck or skill is whether or not it means we should regulate it as a form of gambling.
anyone able to catch the name of the bot gambling fiasco that was mentioned by the q&a hijacker? thx
search for "betfair leopardstown error" and you'll find the details
does anyone else hear the creepy voice talking over a head set at 23:40
no, there is no voice except for the questioning man
spoooooky ;)
satan for sure...he does this all the time...i'll bet you've heard this before on other videos...he's tuning you in...satan's got a plan for you
Yes. Interesting. I listened a few times and was unable to decipher the whispered content. There must be people trained to do exactly this. Would spectral analysis help?
maybe it's some kind of secret message which comes as an audio engineer's error in disguise... seperateing normal youtube viewers from curious geniuses who process the audio and solve the riddle to then be hired by a secret society of ultra rich people searching for the creme de la creme to offer them a job.... or maybe it's just an error.
wasnt expecting 10 seconds of asmr at the end
Explain please
@@jeremyjery01 it seems they edited out the end of the video where there was some weird audio stuff after the clapping
Just went out to buy lottery tickets after listening to the lecture and while still listening to this Q&A, bought 10 tickets 4 lines on each so that's 40 chances to potentially win big, the game is you choose 10 numbers out of 80. I've spent , won back lol I don't know what I've learned🤣I did win €10k in the same lottery two years ago to be fair (guesses right 8 numbers out of 10 winning numbers), so it is possible to win. Calculating anything at least in the lottery I'm not sure about that at all thou.
" To beat the casinos, you need an infinite amount of time and infinite resources" Albert Einstein
As with many other things, Einstein was an idiot.
and einstein was qualified on the theory of probability and game theory how?
haha Im really not a fan of his but I think that statement has some validity towards most gamblers. Its pretty hard to find an edge against the house.
@@Riptions It's actually very easy if you have self discipline. Baccarat only has a slightly greater than 1% edge for the house. If you can't figure out how to beat that you shouldn't gamble.
I have a system in 6/55 lotto. I won 180 times the 4 numbers and the 3 numbers a lot of times in a span of 4 years. I bet 300 combinations every draw. Do I have an edge? Is that something or worthless?
How is it working for you 3 years later? Would you mind sharing your strategy?
Are you following a set pattern
It's like the game of "Nuclear mutual assured destruction"..just don't play is the only winning bet
In my case it would be I would need to buy the market all of it
but how do you know how many atoms there are in the universe?
They mean the observable universe. The size of the observable universe is able to be estimated.
They don't.
Oh Yea since watching this I am now inundated with gambling Google ads...
Sorry.
Casinos do well because 99% of the gamblers lose.
The speaker is unfortunately exceptionally poor at giving satisfying true replies to their questions.
yep...I sense a great deal of unease. i think he's out of his element elaborating on the practicalities of his book's findings in everyday life. i suspect he's undoubtedly fine with his book as a project of intellectual pursuit. but he seems lost in conveying any real wisdom his book has offer. and it wouldn't be surprising if he's a bit intimidated and probably suffering from a good bit of impostor syndrome (which can happen even to experts).
well, one might also argue the questions were poor.
Jay Bingham agreed. And to see his facial expressions and stress reflexes during the presentation proves your point. Maybe good with books and equations. Definitely awkward socially.
Since this video was published AI has successfully conquered the game called GO
It happened before this talk in 2015 and he references that GO has been beaten in the talk
What is AI?
Is it non-human?
Is it superior to the Intelligence that of humans?
AI is in fact a low-end or hardware type of Intelligence (that of I/O) and different from intelligence that requires logic. When we trip, we react to balance. We crawl, we sit, we stand and we learn to walk. We ride bicycles and we drive cars. Our bodies process a vast amount of I/O data while performing these tasks and most interestingly we actually acquire them. Biologically this is what AI is!
AI and HI coexist in humans biologically. People here try to paint pictures and tell stories exactly the same way the casino owners do...
The 350 Million figure on the bus wasn't a lie it was the gross figure we send to the EU each week. It could be seen as misleading to suggest that we can send all this money to the NHS, however the real figure we give to the EU each week and never see again is 220m of uk taxpayers money giving away when the nhs is short of funds. Get your facts right before you spout your remainer agenda.
I'd ask you to leave, but you're already on your way out...
Lol you won and still cry. Oops. Looks like you wont be keepong any of it any way xD
And now the NHS is on a cash pile🤣🤣🤣
You fell for it
Go, more combinations than atoms in the universe, has now been solved by AlphaGo
AlphaGo still can't even beat human chess AIs (stockfish) under standard chess rules, they played under different rules designed to help AlphaGo.
Secondly, even if AlphaGo could reliably defeat every other chess AI, it wouldn't mean chess was solved. It would have to be literally impossible to beat (even by an omniscient being) for chess to be solved.
AlphaGo hasn't "solved" Go, it's just better at it than any human. "Solving" a game is something different.
The long discussion syntactically shrug because thought monthly nest behind a devilish tuba. equal, six joke
Google Deepmind
Hi, I trust you are not a millionaire seeing as you are here answering a q&a, my question is, with all the knowledge you shared, why are you not a millionaire?
lack of Lamborguinis.
Shaun Connolly he has prolly some stupid inane desire to do good in the world instead, like putting talents towards a pointless day job like working towards eliminating/mitigating effects from communicable diseases...what a charlatan!
How do you know he isn't a millionaire? A million bucks is not a lot nowadays. Lots of millionaires and even billionaires gives interviews and q&a for free.
Do you actually think that anyone who studies these things can easily become a millionaire?
Yes
Computers cannot beat humans in no limit poker.
Sorry to disappoint you, but yes it can...
www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/30/libratus-poker-artificial-intelligence-professional-human-players-competition
Deeper NL and PL 3+ player games are still fairly well insulated from computers though. The question at around 3:30 gets at some of the hairier issues bots will have there. Basically, in 3+ player games, Nash strategies can lose to strategies which deviate from Nash and, essentially 'collude' against the Nash player. The 'collusion' in this sense can occur either intentionally or unintentionally, willfully or against the will of (and to the detriment of) one of the non-Nash players.
Do you have anything to read on the deviation from nash strategies in 3+ player games? Sounds fascinating.
I'm nothing near an academic and I can't recommend any academic resources to you, but there's a short chapter on the topic in Chen and Ankenman's "Mathematics of Poker." The book's one of three poker books I'd consider not to be fluff and is worth a read if you're interested in poker/applied game theory in general.
For poker specifically there are multiway solvers out there too, and you can toy around with some actual poker scenarios if you buy one of those (solve for the 3way nash, then set one strat to fixed non-nash and one to fixed nash, and solve the final strat for max exploit to see the aforementioned effects), but the solvers themselves aren't cheap and you'll need a quality lab computer to look at anything meaningful. Most people that are using the solvers for real work need a machine with at least 256gb ram (yes, I'm sure I mean ram).
More waste of time. If science could give an edge to gamblers, casinos around the world would have gone out of business, instead of sprawling and flourishing.
I don't know if you've seen the entire thing, but he does mention (either here, or in the lecture he gave) that casinos find out about these things, and then try to counter them, using various methods to make sure that the gamblers don't have an edge over the casino.
Majed Al Shamsi
Gamblers do get an edge pretty frequently. Its called 'running good' or 'getting lucky'. But it has nothing to do with math and it is always temporary. The trick is to get the hell out of the casino once the winning streak is over.
No, a "good run" is not the same as having an edge. And your "trick" does nothing to affect your chances. Lucky for the casinos 99% of gamblers are not geniuses or card counters, and the ones who are they can find and ban before they lose too much money.
"casinos around the world would have gone out of business"
Not at all. They simply ban the players who turn a profit.
Also, not everybody is a scientist.
Oh Yea since watching this I am now inundated with gambling Google ads...