I've played against rs03rs03 quite a few times in cheapo DONs. You would never know he multitables to the extent that he does given his response times and he never struck me as being particularly bad (although the level of play at the tables he frequents is pretty bad in general.) I heard a few days ago that he's down on the year, winnings-wise.
In the end, rs03rs03 averages 120 tables at once when at full speed, playing about 100,000 hands over the course of about 55,800 seconds. That's about 1.8 hands per second (slightly more actions, though, since some hands are multi-decision).
"Muscle-boys scattered through the crowd were flexing stock parts at one another and trying on this, cold grins, some of them so lost under superstructures of muscle graft that their outlines weren't really human."
It's so nice of the Turing squad to let me know how to optimize my new poker bot. All I have to do is train it to mimic my play characteristics within a reasonable measure.
Pretty much, yes. I'm saying that they've tipped their hand by saying what sorts of measures they use to determine humanness.
Specifically I was getting at the core of their test: #1, that the player has certain characteristics, for instance hesitation, error rate, that they have measured and which are presumably reasonable; #2, that what they are measuring is in fact coordination between the characteristics of the online play and the characteristics of the human play.
I've played against rs03rs03 quite a few times in cheapo DONs. You would never know he multitables to the extent that he does given his response times and he never struck me as being particularly bad (although the level of play at the tables he frequents is pretty bad in general.) I heard a few days ago that he's down on the year, winnings-wise.
It's amazing the resources that are brought to bear when money is involved.
Or videogames. See also the Portal prank decoding.
In the end, rs03rs03 averages 120 tables at once when at full speed, playing about 100,000 hands over the course of about 55,800 seconds. That's about 1.8 hands per second (slightly more actions, though, since some hands are multi-decision).
I think "human" might be pushing it.
Did he have a dream about a unicorn?
"Muscle-boys scattered through the crowd were flexing stock parts at one another and trying on this, cold grins, some of them so lost under superstructures of muscle graft that their outlines weren't really human."
Muscles injected with adult stem cells defy normal aging according to Colorado study and related articles.
It's so nice of the Turing squad to let me know how to optimize my new poker bot. All I have to do is train it to mimic my play characteristics within a reasonable measure.
Well that's tautological: "to pass the Turing Test, act like a human."
Pretty much, yes. I'm saying that they've tipped their hand by saying what sorts of measures they use to determine humanness.
Specifically I was getting at the core of their test: #1, that the player has certain characteristics, for instance hesitation, error rate, that they have measured and which are presumably reasonable; #2, that what they are measuring is in fact coordination between the characteristics of the online play and the characteristics of the human play.