Comments on: Computer gamers develop problem-solving algorithm that beats scientists’ best efforts

By: bob

bob — Sun, 27 May 2012 06:31:47 +0000

@prentice
because there wasn’t as much emphasis on “crowdsourcing” (as it is often called) beck then?
because it seemed to be more efficient to do it themselves?
because not enough people had powerful enough computers to run such a program?
because not enough people had a good enough internet connection to collaborate on such a problem well?

it wasn’t easy to make the program that the people used.

By: prentice

prentice — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:40:03 +0000

So Ed. Let me get this straight. “The problem was framed in a way that ALLOWED groups of non specialists to solve it”. So why weren’t the problems that have been puzzleing scientists for years framed this way back then? Maybe it wouldn’t have puzzled the scientists so long if someone already knew how to frame it so it could be solved. Sounds like another case of creating overtime to me. I guess I just assumed video gamers were young. My mistake.

By: Leon

Leon — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 05:48:40 +0000

If these discoveries are so important, perhaps this game should receive funding?

By: Ed Yong

Ed Yong — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:43:51 +0000

“It proves it doesn’t take a lot of education but mostly common sense to solve problems.”

Er, no.

First, this particular problem was framed in a very specific way that allowed groups of non-specialists to solve it. It was framed that way by specialists!

Second, you assume “young people”… because they play video games? I said nothing about the age of the players.

By: prentice

prentice — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:30:31 +0000

The fact that young people,most with no scientific background what-so-ever, can solve problems that have been puzzeling scientists for years speaks volumes. It proves it doesn’t take a lot of education but mostly common sense to solve problems. Common sense is a lot cheaper too. If a group of young people can do it on their own then we can save trillions by not earmarking all these dollars to science. Let the people speak and the scientists who think the common people are stupid may learn a thing or two.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 14:29:30 +0000

This gives renewed support for the idea that we go about educating our children all wrong. Sitting at a desk and doing the “basics” in order to pass a test put together by a company in Texas and graded by temporary workers is a terrible way to teach children. Make it interesting and challenging…child or adult will learn and create.

By: Hemo_jr

Hemo_jr — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 01:36:50 +0000

Orson Scott Card should be happy. This is the essence of “Ender’s Game” come real.

By: amphiox

amphiox — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 00:18:40 +0000

Strategic skill trumps automation once again!

It’s more than just that, though. It’s cooperation and networking. The computer program still trumps any individual human.

By: Mr. Network Security

Mr. Network Security — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:25:33 +0000

Strategic skill trumps automation once again!

By: Conor Myhrvold

Conor Myhrvold — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 07:12:44 +0000

Great post about harnessing the crowd-sourcing of science.

In terms of improving algorithms Kaggle (featured in Feb 2011 Science Data issue, and more recently here http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/a-site-for-data-scientists-to-prove-their-skills-and-make-money/ ) is also going to be a major player.

I have read a lot of news releases about the AIDS protein discovery on Foldit so when I first glanced at the post I thought it was going to be a rehashing of old news, but definitely putting the program in perspective is a value-added contribution.