Robot beats human at rock, paper, scissors. Every time.

Apparently what most of us had assumed was an innocent game of chance, an equitable way of say, determining who gets to ride shotgun, is actually a computational problem that can be measured, analyzed, and, if your'e a robot with a high-speed camera and lightning-quick motors, mastered. 

Youtube screengrab

It didn't really come as a surprise when they started beating us at checkers. There are, after all, a finite number of possible configurations of pieces on the board (about 500 billion billion), each with an optimal move. Creating a computer program that could never lose at checkers really just came down to a matter of mathematics and processing power.

Even chess, with all its metaphors for foresight and circumspection, can ultimately be boiled down to computation. In 1997, when IBM's Deep Blue machine defeated grandmaster Gary Kasparov, many regarded it not as a question of if, but of when.  

It was somewhat more unsettling when they started mastering trivia. But even when IBM's supercomputer, Watson, defeated Jeopardy! champion Ken Jennings last year, we meatbags could comfort ourselves by knowing that all the machine was really doing was plucking keywords and searching the encyclopedias stored in its four-terabyte hard disk. 

But rock, paper, scissors?!

Apparently what most of us had assumed was an innocent game of chance, an equitable way of say, determining who gets to ride shotgun, is actually a computational problem that can be measured, analyzed, and, if your'e a robot with a high-speed camera and lightning-quick motors, mastered. 

A robot at the University of Tokyo's Ishikawa Oku Lab has done just that. Dubbed the "human-machine cooperation system" – "cooperation" being a robotics term for "humiliation" – this mechanical hand is able to beat a human opponent at rock paper scissors. Every time.   

Unlike other electronic rock, paper, scissors opponents, such as this epic time waster on the New York Times's website, that analyze patterns gathered from thousands of previous games, this one defeats humans simply by being really, really fast. 

According to the press release from the Ishikawa Oku lab, it takes just one thousandth of a second for the robot can recognize the shape of the human hand just as the rock, paper, or scissors is being thrown. It takes only a few more thousandths of a second – far faster than a  human can detect – for the robot to shape its fingers into a winning response. 

When viewed in realtime, it appears as though the robot is reading the human's mind. It's only when you slow the video down to one 50th of the speed that you can see the delay in the machine's response, and even then the lag is just barely perceptible.

Time magazine suggests that the robots uncanny reflexes might be helpful in disasters or war zones, where timing is everything. Such life-saving advancements would be welcome. But watching this video, you cannot help wanting to see the human respond by dumping a cup of coffee on the robot.    

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.