DOCSLIB.ORG

Complementing, Not Competing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Complementing, Not Competing Complementing, Not Competing An Ethnographic Study of the Internet and American Go Communities Drew Harry Sean Munson May 2005 Culture, Knowledge, and Creativity 2 Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Background and Context ............................................................................................................................ 6 Introduction to Go ......................................................................................................................................... 7 The Massachusetts Go Association.............................................................................................................. 9 Internet Go.................................................................................................................................................... 10 Research Methods........................................................................................................................................13 Interview Profiles......................................................................................................................................... 14 Interview Analysis....................................................................................................................................... 15 Why Do People Play Go?............................................................................................................................16 The Relationship Between Online Go and Offline Go .....................................................................18 Etiquette, Norms and Values of the Go Community ........................................................................23 Conclusions....................................................................................................................................................27 Differences in Online and Offline Users................................................................................................... 27 Youth Adoption of Go.................................................................................................................................. 28 The Role of Popular Media .................................................................................................................... 29 Youth Engagement................................................................................................................................. 30 Communities of Practice............................................................................................................................. 33 Complementing Not Competing................................................................................................................. 35 Participant Confidentiality In the course of this research, we strove to protect the identities of our interviewees. All names used in this document are pseudonyms. Some personal details have also been changed, though never those that we felt were important for understanding the context of an interviewee’s stories. 3 4 Introduction Civic engagement in this country is falling, and has been falling for a generation or more.1 Putnam finds found this to be true around the country, across demographic groups, and getting worse with each new generation. Involvement in clubs and other community organizations plays a crucial role in the generation and maintenance of social capital – the networks of relationships that bind communities together, and grease the wheels of human interaction. We agree with both his thesis that civic engagement is in a free-fall, and that this is a trend that needs to be reversed. Since Tocqueville’s nineteenth century survey of American democracy civic engagement through clubs and organizations has been identified as crucial wells of social capital.2 They provide spaces independent of work and home for people to meet around a common interest. Often, these organizations have helped build social capital across social boundaries, bringing together people who might not otherwise know each other. Since Tocqueville’s work, technology has fundamentally changed how people communicate and organize and so the question of how these clubs and organizations use their new technological tools is an important one. In Bowling Alone, Putnam sees the Internet as something of a wildcard; there is both promise and peril in its rapid adoption. To the extent that the Internet is like television (a major factor in civic decline, according to Putnam), he believed it could be part of the problem. Yet in his latest book, Better Together, Putnam points out that “as of 2002, 62.5 percent of all Americans send e-mail or instant messages.”3 It is promising that the most popular uses of the Internet are features that connect people, not those that are solitary. The Internet has the potential help old acquaintances maintain longer-distance ties and, hopefully, to build new relationships. While the conversation about whether purely online communities, the Internet’s analogs to PTAs, Bowling Leagues, or VFW, exist is valuable4, we investigate the Internet’s 1 Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Society. New York: Simon and Schuster. 2 Putnam, Robert D. January 1995. “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital,” Journal of Democracy. pgs 65-78. 3 Putnam, Robert D., Lewis Feldstein, and Donald J Cohen. September 2003. Better Together: Restoring American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster, page 226. 4 Rheingold, Howard. 2000. The Virtual Community. Cambridge: MIT Press. Also, Putnam, 2003. 5 role from another perspective. Pre-existing community organizations, many of which were created between 1900 and 1940,5 have been slowly adopting Internet technologies. Groups like Alcoholics Anonymous now have websites, mailing lists, and forums. How do capabilities offered by the Internet affect these organizations? Do Internet offerings compete with the physical meetings of the group or complement the groups’ missions? To attempt to answer these questions, we studied Go players, both online and offline, in the United States. To better understand the offline context of Go, we focused our efforts on one particular club, the Massachusetts Go Association. Using a range of ethnographic methods, we describe the ways in which the growth of online play has been a major boon to the Go community in general, helping regular players sustain interest in the game, bringing new players, and making the game accessible for players who are geographically separated. We feel that there are some specific reasons why Go players are important to study. Unlike many organizations, whose memberships are in decline, the American Go Association, Go’s US national governing body, has over 2100 members, more than at any previous point in its history. More than three times their membership subscribes to their weekly email journal. Membership has more than doubled since 1985, the first year for which the AGA reports membership statistics. While these numbers are low compared to those of most national organizations, their rise in the face of the trends discussed by Putnam is significant. No small part of this success has been with young players, a demographic that Putnam identifies as being particularly unengaged. As occasional Go players ourselves we knew enough about the community, and the role technology plays in it, to pique our interest. We were specifically curious as to whether the Internet had helped or hindered the AGA in maintaining its membership growth. Go is just one of many communities that have embraced Internet tools, and we were hopeful that our work would reveal some themes about how this can affect the number and engagement of members of such organizations. To understand the ways in which the Internet might interact with the Go Community, we looked to previous work by Wellman, Boase, and Chen. They propose three ways in which the Internet can affect communities. 5 Putnam 2000, page 388. 6 • “The Internet weakens community: The immersive nature of the Internet may be so compelling that Internet users neglect their family, friends, relatives and neighbors • “The Internet enhances community: People mostly use the Internet to maintain contact with existing community members, either by adding Internet contact on to telephone and face-to-face contact or by shifting their means of communication to the Internet. • “The Internet transforms community: The Internet’s connectivity better enables people to develop far-flung communities of shared interest, possibly at the expense of local contact.”6 In the communities Wellman and colleagues studied, transformation was the most typical result. Based on the evidence that the AGA continued to enjoy membership growth, and on the Internet’s ability to connect dispersed Go players and Go organizations, we hypothesized that the Internet plays a transforming role in the Go community and that understanding this role would contribute to the discussion of the Internet’s role in generating social capital. We found that the Internet actually enhances the Go community than it transforms it. Players use online Go to supplement their offline Go experience; the Internet made it easier for them to keep playing the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rules of Go It Would Be Suicidal (And Hence Illegal) for White to Play at E, the Board Is Initially Because the Block of Four White Empty
    Scoring Example another liberty at D. Rules of Go It would be suicidal (and hence illegal) for white to play at E, The board is initially because the block of four white empty. stones would have no liberties. Could black play at E? It looks like a suicidal move, because Black plays first. the black stone would have no liberties, but it would occupy On a turn, either place a the white block’s last liberty at stone on a vacant inter- the same time; the move is legal and the white stones are section or pass (giving a captured. stone to the opponent to The black block F can never be keep as a prisoner). In the diagram above, white captured. It has two internal has 8 points in the center and liberties (eyes) at the points Stones may be captured 7 points at the upper right. marked G. To capture the by tightly surrounding Two white stones (shown be- block, white would have to oc- low the board) are prisoners. cupy both of them, but either them. Captured stones White’s score is 8 + 7 − 2 = 13. move would be suicidal and are taken off the board Black has 3 points at the up- therefore illegal. and kept as prisoners. per left and 9 at the lower Suppose white plays at H, cap- right. One black stone is a turing the black stone at I. prisoner. Black’s score is (Notice that H is not an eye.) It is illegal to make a − 3 + 9 1 = 11. White wins.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Play Go Lesson 1: Introduction to Go
    How To Play Go Lesson 1: Introduction To Go 1.1 About The Game Of Go Go is an ancient game originated from China, with a definite history of over 3000 years, although there are historians who say that the game was invented more than 4000 years ago. The Chinese call the game Weiqi. Other names for Go include Baduk (Korean), Igo (Japanese) and Goe (Taiwanese). This game is getting increasingly popular around the world, especially in Asian, European and American countries, with many worldwide competitions being held. Diagram 1-1 The game of Go is played on a board as shown in Diagram 1-1. The Go set comprises of the board, together with 180 black and white stones each. Diagram 1-1 shows the standard 19x19 board (i.e. the board has 19 lines by 19 lines), but there are 13x13 and 9x9 boards in play. However, the 9x9 and 13x13 boards are usually for beginners; more advanced players would prefer the traditional 19x19 board. Compared to International Chess and Chinese Chess, Go has far fewer rules. Yet this allowed for all sorts of moves to be played, so Go can be a more intellectually challenging game than the other two types of Chess. Nonetheless, Go is not a difficult game to learn, so have a fun time playing the game with your friends. Several rule sets exist and are commonly used throughout the world. Two of the most common ones are Chinese rules and Japanese rules. Another is Ing's rules. All the rules are basically the same, the only significant difference is in the way counting of territories is done when the game ends.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson Plans for Go in Schools
    Go Lesson Plans 1 Lesson Plans for Go in Schools By Gordon E. Castanza, Ed. D. October 19, 2011 Published By Rittenberg Consulting Group 7806 108th St. NW Gig Harbor, WA 98332 253-853-4831 ©Gordon E. Castanza, Ed. D. 10/19/11 DRAFT Go Lesson Plans 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 4 Purpose/Rationale ........................................................................................................................... 5 Lesson Plan One ............................................................................................................................. 7 Basic Ideas .................................................................................................................................. 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 11 The Puzzle ................................................................................................................................. 13 Surround to Capture .................................................................................................................. 14 First Capture Go ........................................................................................................................ 16 Lesson Plan Two ........................................................................................................................... 19 Units &
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Go: from the Beginnings to Alphago Martin Müller, University of Alberta
    Computer Go: from the Beginnings to AlphaGo Martin Müller, University of Alberta 2017 Outline of the Talk ✤ Game of Go ✤ Short history - Computer Go from the beginnings to AlphaGo ✤ The science behind AlphaGo ✤ The legacy of AlphaGo The Game of Go Go ✤ Classic two-player board game ✤ Invented in China thousands of years ago ✤ Simple rules, complex strategy ✤ Played by millions ✤ Hundreds of top experts - professional players ✤ Until 2016, computers weaker than humans Go Rules ✤ Start with empty board ✤ Place stone of your own color ✤ Goal: surround empty points or opponent - capture ✤ Win: control more than half the board Final score, 9x9 board ✤ Komi: first player advantage Measuring Go Strength ✤ People in Europe and America use the traditional Japanese ranking system ✤ Kyu (student) and Dan (master) levels ✤ Separate Dan ranks for professional players ✤ Kyu grades go down from 30 (absolute beginner) to 1 (best) ✤ Dan grades go up from 1 (weakest) to about 6 ✤ There is also a numerical (Elo) system, e.g. 2500 = 5 Dan Short History of Computer Go Computer Go History - Beginnings ✤ 1960’s: initial ideas, designs on paper ✤ 1970’s: first serious program - Reitman & Wilcox ✤ Interviews with strong human players ✤ Try to build a model of human decision-making ✤ Level: “advanced beginner”, 15-20 kyu ✤ One game costs thousands of dollars in computer time 1980-89 The Arrival of PC ✤ From 1980: PC (personal computers) arrive ✤ Many people get cheap access to computers ✤ Many start writing Go programs ✤ First competitions, Computer Olympiad, Ing Cup ✤ Level 10-15 kyu 1990-2005: Slow Progress ✤ Slow progress, commercial successes ✤ 1990 Ing Cup in Beijing ✤ 1993 Ing Cup in Chengdu ✤ Top programs Handtalk (Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Guide for Go in Schools
    Curriculum Guide 1 Curriculum Guide for Go In Schools by Gordon E. Castanza, Ed. D. October 19, 2011 Published By: Rittenberg Consulting Group 7806 108th St. NW Gig Harbor, WA 98332 253-853-4831 © 2005 by Gordon E. Castanza, Ed. D. Curriculum Guide 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 4 Purpose and Rationale..................................................................................................................... 5 About this curriculum guide ................................................................................................... 7 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 9 Building Go Instructor Capacity ........................................................................................... 10 Developing Relationships and Communicating with the Community ................................. 10 Using Resources Effectively ................................................................................................. 11 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 11 Major Trends and Issues ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Learning to Play the Game of Go
    Learning to Play the Game of Go James Foulds October 17, 2006 Abstract The problem of creating a successful artificial intelligence game playing program for the game of Go represents an important milestone in the history of computer science, and provides an interesting domain for the development of both new and existing problem-solving methods. In particular, the problem of Go can be used as a benchmark for machine learning techniques. Most commercial Go playing programs use rule-based expert systems, re- lying heavily on manually entered domain knowledge. Due to the complexity of strategy possible in the game, these programs can only play at an amateur level of skill. A more recent approach is to apply machine learning to the prob- lem. Machine learning-based Go playing systems are currently weaker than the rule-based programs, but this is still an active area of research. This project compares the performance of an extensive set of supervised machine learning algorithms in the context of learning from a set of features generated from the common fate graph – a graph representation of a Go playing board. The method is applied to a collection of life-and-death problems and to 9 × 9 games, using a variety of learning algorithms. A comparative study is performed to determine the effectiveness of each learning algorithm in this context. Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Background 4 2.1 Go................................... 4 2.1.1 DescriptionoftheGame. 5 2.1.2 TheHistoryofGo ...................... 6 2.1.3 Elementary Strategy . 7 2.1.4 Player Rankings and Handicaps . 7 2.1.5 Tsumego ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Go: an AI Oriented Survey
    Computer Go: an AI Oriented Survey Bruno Bouzy Université Paris 5, UFR de mathématiques et d'informatique, C.R.I.P.5, 45, rue des Saints-Pères 75270 Paris Cedex 06 France tel: (33) (0)1 44 55 35 58, fax: (33) (0)1 44 55 35 35 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~bouzy/ Tristan Cazenave Université Paris 8, Département Informatique, Laboratoire IA 2, rue de la Liberté 93526 Saint-Denis Cedex France e-mail: [email protected] http://www.ai.univ-paris8.fr/~cazenave/ Abstract Since the beginning of AI, mind games have been studied as relevant application fields. Nowadays, some programs are better than human players in most classical games. Their results highlight the efficiency of AI methods that are now quite standard. Such methods are very useful to Go programs, but they do not enable a strong Go program to be built. The problems related to Computer Go require new AI problem solving methods. Given the great number of problems and the diversity of possible solutions, Computer Go is an attractive research domain for AI. Prospective methods of programming the game of Go will probably be of interest in other domains as well. The goal of this paper is to present Computer Go by showing the links between existing studies on Computer Go and different AI related domains: evaluation function, heuristic search, machine learning, automatic knowledge generation, mathematical morphology and cognitive science. In addition, this paper describes both the practical aspects of Go programming, such as program optimization, and various theoretical aspects such as combinatorial game theory, mathematical morphology, and Monte- Carlo methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Go Books Detail
    Evanston Go Club Ian Feldman Lending Library A Compendium of Trick Plays Nihon Ki-in In this unique anthology, the reader will find the subject of trick plays in the game of go dealt with in a thorough manner. Practically anything one could wish to know about the subject is examined from multiple perpectives in this remarkable volume. Vital points in common patterns, skillful finesse (tesuji) and ordinary matters of good technique are discussed, as well as the pitfalls that are concealed in seemingly innocuous positions. This is a gem of a handbook that belongs on the bookshelf of every go player. Chapter 1 was written by Ishida Yoshio, former Meijin-Honinbo, who intimates that if "joseki can be said to be the highway, trick plays may be called a back alley. When one masters the alleyways, one is on course to master joseki." Thirty-five model trick plays are presented in this chapter, #204 and exhaustively analyzed in the style of a dictionary. Kageyama Toshiro 7 dan, one of the most popular go writers, examines the subject in Chapter 2 from the standpoint of full board strategy. Chapter 3 is written by Mihori Sho, who collaborated with Sakata Eio to produce Killer of Go. Anecdotes from the history of go, famous sayings by Sun Tzu on the Art of Warfare and contemporary examples of trickery are woven together to produce an entertaining dialogue. The final chapter presents twenty-five problems for the reader to solve, using the knowledge gained in the preceding sections. Do not be surprised to find unexpected booby traps lurking here also.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Jay Burmeister Janet Wiles Departments of Computer Science and Psychology The University of Queensland, QLD 4072, Australia Technical Report 339, Department of Computer Science, The University of Queensland, 1995 (This document is - permanently - under construction). See also: Jay Burmeister’s PhD Thesis (2000) Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 2.0 The Game of Go 2.1 Liberties and Capture 2.1.1 Suicide 2.2 Strings 2.3 Eyes 2.3.1 Dead or Alive 2.3.2 False Eyes 2.3.3 Seki 2.4 Repetition of Board Positions - Ko 2.5 Sente and Gote 2.6 Ladders 2.6.1 Snapbacks 2.7 Links 2.8 Groups 2.9 Armies 2.10 Winning the Game 2.11 The Go Handicap and Ranking System 3.0 The Challenge of Programming Go 3.1 A Comparison of Chess and Go 3.2 The Complexity of Go 3.3 Why Go Cannot be Programmed Like Chess 4.0 History of the Computer Go Field 4.1 Academic Work 4.1.1 Zobrist 4.1.2 Ryder 4.1.3 Reitman and Wilcox 4.1.4 Other Academic Work 4.2 Programs 4.2.1 The Many Faces of Go 4.2.1.1 G2 4.2.1.2 Cosmos 4.2.1.3 Many Faces of Go 4.2.2 Go4++ 4.2.2.1 Candidate Move Generation 4.2.2.2 Evaluation Function 4.2.2.3 Performance and Timeline 4.2.3 Handtalk 4.3 Computer Go Competitions 4.3.1 The Ing Prize 5.0 What's in a Go Program? 6.0 Performance of Current Programs 6.1 Program versus Program Performance 6.2 Program versus Human Performance 7.0 Future Improvements in Performance 8.0 Go and Computer Go Resources on the Internet 8.1 Computer Go related Internet Resources 8.1.1 Anonymous FTP Archive and Mirror Sites 8.1.2 The Internet Go Server (IGS) 8.1.3 Game Record Formats
    [Show full text]
  • The Way to Go Is a Copyrighted Work
    E R I C M A N A G F O O N How to U I O N D A T www.usgo.org www.agfgo.org play the Asian game of Go The Way to by Karl Baker American Go Association Box 397 Old Chelsea Station New York, NY 10113 GO Legal Note: The Way To Go is a copyrighted work. Permission is granted to make complete copies for personal use. Copies may be distributed freely to others either in print or electronic form, provided no fee is charged for distribution and all copies contain this copyright notice. The Way to Go by Karl Baker American Go Association Box 397 Old Chelsea Station New York, NY 10113 http://www.usgo.org Cover print: Two Immortals and the Woodcutter A watercolor by Seikan. Date unknown. How to play A scene from the Ranka tale: Immortals playing go as the the ancient/modern woodcutter looks on. From Japanese Prints and the World of Go by William Pinckard at: Asian Game of Go http://www.kiseido.com/printss/cover.htm Dedicated to Ann All in good time there will come a climax which will lift one to the heights, but first a foundation must be laid, INSPIRED BY HUNDREDS broad, deep and solid... OF BAFFLED STUDENTS Winfred Ernest Garrison © Copyright 1986, 2008 Preface American Go Association The game of GO is the essence of simplicity and the ultimate in complexity all at the same time. It is taught earnestly at military officer training schools in the Orient, as an exercise in military strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Choices: Small Budgets and Simple Regret Cheng-Wei Chou, Ping-Chiang Chou, Chang-Shing Lee, David L
    Strategic Choices: Small Budgets and Simple Regret Cheng-Wei Chou, Ping-Chiang Chou, Chang-Shing Lee, David L. Saint-Pierre, Olivier Teytaud, Mei-Hui Wang, Li-Wen Wu, Shi-Jim Yen To cite this version: Cheng-Wei Chou, Ping-Chiang Chou, Chang-Shing Lee, David L. Saint-Pierre, Olivier Teytaud, et al.. Strategic Choices: Small Budgets and Simple Regret. TAAI, 2012, Hualien, Taiwan. hal-00753145v1 HAL Id: hal-00753145 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00753145v1 Submitted on 19 Nov 2012 (v1), last revised 18 Mar 2013 (v2) HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Strategic Choices: Small Budgets and Simple Regret Cheng-Wei Chou 1, Ping-Chiang Chou, Chang-Shing Lee 2, David Lupien Saint-Pierre 3, Olivier Teytaud 4, Mei-Hui Wang 2, Li-Wen Wu 2 and Shi-Jim Yen 2 1Dept. of Computer Science and Information Engineering NDHU, Hualian, Taiwan 2Dept. of Computer Science and Information Engineering National University of Tainan, Taiwan 3Montefiore Institute Universit´ede Li`ege, Belgium 4TAO (Inria), LRI, UMR 8623(CNRS - Univ. Paris-Sud) bat 490 Univ. Paris-Sud 91405 Orsay, France November 17, 2012 Abstract In many decision problems, there are two levels of choice: The first one is strategic and the second is tactical.
    [Show full text]
  • Move Prediction in the Game of Go
    Move Prediction in the Game of Go A Thesis presented by Brett Alexander Harrison to Computer Science in partial fulfillment of the honors requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts Harvard College Cambridge, Massachusetts April 1, 2010 Abstract As a direct result of artificial intelligence research, computers are now expert players in a variety of popular games, including Checkers, Chess, Othello (Reversi), and Backgammon. Yet one game continues to elude the efforts of computer scientists: Go, also known as Igo in Japan, Weiqi in China, and Baduk in Korea. Due in part to the strategic complexity of Go and the sheer number of moves available to each player, most typical game-playing algorithms have failed to be effective with Go. Even state-of-the-art computer Go programs are weaker than high-ranking amateurs. Thus Go provides the perfect framework for devel- oping and testing new ideas in a variety of fields in computer science, including algorithms, computational game theory, and machine learning. In this thesis, we explore the problem of move prediction in the game of Go. The move prediction problem asks how we can build a program which trains on Go games in order to predict the moves of professional and high-ranking amateur players in other Go games. An accurate move predictor could serve as a powerful component of Go-playing programs, since it can be used to reduce the branching factor in game tree search and can be used as an effective move ordering heuristic. Our first main contribution to this field is the creation of a novel move prediction system, based on a naive Bayes model, which builds upon the work of several previous move prediction systems.
    [Show full text]