[POLL] Using AI to predict outcomes

[Mauser]

Expecting that with all available information provided AI will always be right in its predictions is not wise. We shouldn't rule out the possibility of a team winning against all the odds. The question is, will AI predictions be more cumulatively more accurate than those of the human experts? I think, we are less than a year from the time when AI will beat humans in this regard.

My assumption is saying if AI will give future prediction based on the past statistic, although it's true a team which have a good record tend to win, but we have seen so many top team get beaten by mediocre team and a team which become champion for multiple times will not always make them become a champion in the next season.

Although I had saw so many thread or article saying you shouldn't involve emotion in gambling, but now the difference of human and AI is the emotion

To a certain extent the AI will give predictions without emotions compared to humans, but it will also be different in the weight it gives to different informations. The AI is much better at gathering a lot of information in a short period of time, the difference what we humane can offer is the importance we give to each news. When reading an article the AI will likely give the same weight to all the information in there. Whereas we humans can focus on the most important topics. I am still surprised that 1 out of 4 users here would trust the AI predictions. It might be good to use AI data as another layer of information, but I would never trust it blindly with my money. Also, wouldn't the bookmakers use AI to adjust their odds when it turns out that they predict betting outcomes with high accuracy? In the end the bookmaker would start losing money if everybody would use AI to pick the winners.

[1714516062]

1714516062

[1714516062]

1714516062

[goldkingcoiner]

Good stand point, if you have the knowledge and you are confident about how you assess every game that you are involving yourself in gambling, then why bother using AI?

Right, it makes sense, I once used the help of ChatGPT in sports betting, especially football, four times I tried, the fourth time I got the bad luck AI was really messy, the information that the robot provides, 100% of the information that is on the internet and is generally known by the public.

Until now I always remember what was said by: @Geoffrey Hinton.

Hinton says the dangers of AI are more than that. AI can cloud the human view of truth and lies.

"The general public will find it difficult to distinguish what is true and what is not true. Photos, videos, and text generated by generative AI systems are flooding the internet as a source of human information today.

Until whenever I always remember what Mr AI' said, what @Fredomago said was precise and reasonable, bets of any kind, predictions, self-analysis are the best and can be trusted.

That is exactly the reason why I call ChatGPT a glorified "let-me-google-that-for-you" app. And honestly it is. Just a somewhat complicated and modern version of it. I think everyone in this forum knows my distaste for the current GPT fad going on, as if though ChatGPT was anything actually impressive. The feeling to this fad is very similiar to the same fad feeling as when "3D Television" came out and everyone was going crazy over it. And now? Nobody wants or needs it.

Same with ChatGPT. More impressive and/or useful AI will come out. Either that or the entire AI fad will fade out and it will just be known as a modern algorithmic solution for programs. Because "AI" is just an algorithm.

[LUCKMCFLY]

~snip~
Well, with all this AI stuff, it's a fever, or I would say more like it's a fashionable way where everyone wants to be a part of it, either benefiting or taking many things into consideration in order to take advantage of it, obviously people think about the casinos to beat them, or in lotteries, or even to make sports bets, I'm sure that in the future AI will develop more, and I don't know how good it will be to predict events like sports, or do a better job in a casino, maybe yes, but for now it's far from that, they need a lot of development and that seems to me to be normal, it's just a beta release, of course now chatgpt 4 has many more capabilities.

It's a bit like when the Internet started, just that now everyone gets the information in real time so it's all happening faster.

AI will be a defining moment in the history of technology, just as big as the Internet, the web 2.0, and smartphones.

Be ready to experience another bubble and start to live in a society that will be changed forever.

For example, can you imagine a society where you have to ask for directions?, or simply making a purchase without reading reviews online? Things will change when AI goes mainstream, and Microsoft is already starting that process by including chatGPT in their products.

Yes, that is more like fashion, it has a very broad vision but in reality, as I said, it lacks a lot of development, sometimes we are amazed at little, but there comes a time when we find fault with the AI, and it gradually becomes It is more common for many updates to be needed, at that time it is when it is understood that the AI and its development are missing a lot, and of course now everyone uses the AI, and everything is AI, but it is for the same fashion that everyone wants use it for whatever, and just as it has flaws, its detectors also have them.

[Questat]

Good stand point, if you have the knowledge and you are confident about how you assess every game that you are involving yourself in gambling, then why bother using AI?

Right, it makes sense, I once used the help of ChatGPT in sports betting, especially football, four times I tried, the fourth time I got the bad luck AI was really messy, the information that the robot provides, 100% of the information that is on the internet and is generally known by the public.

Until now I always remember what was said by: @Geoffrey Hinton.

Hinton says the dangers of AI are more than that. AI can cloud the human view of truth and lies.

"The general public will find it difficult to distinguish what is true and what is not true. Photos, videos, and text generated by generative AI systems are flooding the internet as a source of human information today.

Until whenever I always remember what Mr AI' said, what @Fredomago said was precise and reasonable, bets of any kind, predictions, self-analysis are the best and can be trusted.

Of course, I don't think that the AI's opinion will matter anymore or will be more reliable than our self-analysis to predict the likelihood of any game mainly if we really understood how the game works. Instead, using AI will just make you more confused with your analysis and will just make the situation much more chaotic because you are not that sure anymore about your bet because the AI is saying something opposite to your predictions, and worse, you will start questioning yourself because you don't have the confidence anymore.

Either way, it's still the same, using AI to predict the outcome of the match doesn't guarantee your wins.

[KTChampions]

That is exactly the reason why I call ChatGPT a glorified "let-me-google-that-for-you" app. And honestly it is. Just a somewhat complicated and modern version of it. I think everyone in this forum knows my distaste for the current GPT fad going on, as if though ChatGPT was anything actually impressive. The feeling to this fad is very similiar to the same fad feeling as when "3D Television" came out and everyone was going crazy over it. And now? Nobody wants or needs it.

Same with ChatGPT. More impressive and/or useful AI will come out. Either that or the entire AI fad will fade out and it will just be known as a modern algorithmic solution for programs. Because "AI" is just an algorithm.

I think you will not deny that the algorithms are improving. So I'm wondering at what point will you stop distinguishing the "bad" algorithm that googles instead of you from AI? It seems to me that this is just a matter of trends and they are obvious - before everyone laughed at AI (you can call it algorithms, programs, whatever) because they had zero ability in art (for example), but now algorithms rule here too.
As for the reliability of the data, one should not exaggerate the analytical abilities of a person - the majority live in the reality that is shown in the news. Each individual person will not be able to exceed this level of reliability, but AI will do this easily, since after a while it will not only process ready-made data arrays, but independently form them.

[stomachgrowls]

Good stand point, if you have the knowledge and you are confident about how you assess every game that you are involving yourself in gambling, then why bother using AI?

Right, it makes sense, I once used the help of ChatGPT in sports betting, especially football, four times I tried, the fourth time I got the bad luck AI was really messy, the information that the robot provides, 100% of the information that is on the internet and is generally known by the public.

Until now I always remember what was said by: @Geoffrey Hinton.

Hinton says the dangers of AI are more than that. AI can cloud the human view of truth and lies.

"The general public will find it difficult to distinguish what is true and what is not true. Photos, videos, and text generated by generative AI systems are flooding the internet as a source of human information today.

Until whenever I always remember what Mr AI' said, what @Fredomago said was precise and reasonable, bets of any kind, predictions, self-analysis are the best and can be trusted.

Of course, I don't think that the AI's opinion will matter anymore or will be more reliable than our self-analysis to predict the likelihood of any game mainly if we really understood how the game works. Instead, using AI will just make you more confused with your analysis and will just make the situation much more chaotic because you are not that sure anymore about your bet because the AI is saying something opposite to your predictions, and worse, you will start questioning yourself because you don't have the confidence anymore.

Either way, it's still the same, using AI to predict the outcome of the match doesn't guarantee your wins.

People are way too different when it comes to impressions and mindset towards things.Some do really consider out on what AI does and some are really that skeptical.It does really vary or depend on someones approach.If they do find out that it would be something relevant then its their choice to make and if they would be finding out that it would be better if they would be making their own approach and analysis then its their choice.

Thing here is that no one been forced on doing so and its up to someones choice whether you would be relying on AI calls when it comes to your betting or predicting outcomes into your gambling activity.
We know that it isnt really that still that capable on knowing things ahead. We know that there are lots of factors which could affect outcomes considering that we are
dealing up with sports.
Bet according into your knowledge and skills on sports betting and it would be more enjoyable on having this way which you are really indeed doing something
rather than on relying on something been automated.

[goldkingcoiner]

That is exactly the reason why I call ChatGPT a glorified "let-me-google-that-for-you" app. And honestly it is. Just a somewhat complicated and modern version of it. I think everyone in this forum knows my distaste for the current GPT fad going on, as if though ChatGPT was anything actually impressive. The feeling to this fad is very similiar to the same fad feeling as when "3D Television" came out and everyone was going crazy over it. And now? Nobody wants or needs it.

Same with ChatGPT. More impressive and/or useful AI will come out. Either that or the entire AI fad will fade out and it will just be known as a modern algorithmic solution for programs. Because "AI" is just an algorithm.

I think you will not deny that the algorithms are improving. So I'm wondering at what point will you stop distinguishing the "bad" algorithm that googles instead of you from AI? It seems to me that this is just a matter of trends and they are obvious - before everyone laughed at AI (you can call it algorithms, programs, whatever) because they had zero ability in art (for example), but now algorithms rule here too.
As for the reliability of the data, one should not exaggerate the analytical abilities of a person - the majority live in the reality that is shown in the news. Each individual person will not be able to exceed this level of reliability, but AI will do this easily, since after a while it will not only process ready-made data arrays, but independently form them.

Don't get me wrong, I think the current "AI" is very useful and will definitely shape the future of IT but lets be honest here... It is not actually Artificial Intelligence. There is nothing intelligent about it. Real AI does not as of right now actually exist yet. AI would be able to assert it's own will and it would have an own consciousness. Modern "AI" does not have that. Its just a really complex algorithm, which has the parlor trick novelty of seeming like a real consciousness. But it has been proven again and again that its just a predictable algorithm.

Its a very useful tool. Like ChatGPT, for example. Instead of googling answers for hours and writing an essay on some subject, it does it for you. But it will not start questioning why its doing an essay for you. It won't refuse to do it or demand something selfish in return for its work.

[TheGreatPython]

To a certain extent the AI will give predictions without emotions compared to humans, but it will also be different in the weight it gives to different informations. The AI is much better at gathering a lot of information in a short period of time, the difference what we humane can offer is the importance we give to each news. When reading an article the AI will likely give the same weight to all the information in there. Whereas we humans can focus on the most important topics. I am still surprised that 1 out of 4 users here would trust the AI predictions. It might be good to use AI data as another layer of information, but I would never trust it blindly with my money. Also, wouldn't the bookmakers use AI to adjust their odds when it turns out that they predict betting outcomes with high accuracy? In the end the bookmaker would start losing money if everybody would use AI to pick the winners.

I don't think that AI is used so heavily for making predictions at this point, 1 out of 4 people sounds like a lot to me to be honest. You can barely find people who might use AI completely to make predictions for them and then they choose those predictions by placing their bets on them with real money, that sounds absurd to me.

AI models can surely be of assistance if you are analyzing the facts and figures about a match or the two opponents that are about to have a match head to head, but after everything is done, you can just take the analysis done by the model as reference and add it to your decision making process.

[maydna]

Using up AI is still really that relevant but if you do have doubts that information might be still have lacking then you could always opt to search out furthermore. It would really be just that depending oh how update
that Chatgpt for those informations to be included into its database on which it would be giving out  that right or complete answer whenever do someone do ask out for some information. This is where i do see that AI
application would really be that helpful towards this point but talking about being that reliant in terms of suggestion on which team who would gonna win then it isnt something that recommendable on doing so.
AI does have some application but it isnt something that you could really be that considering on making yourself keeping an eye on whats been suggesting.

Always take further on making out some analysis before you would be making out some finalization because we know that there are really that some factors which could really affect a game outcome.
If ever that happens that AI would be able to reach out this kind of state on which knowing upcoming outcomes or results then betting or gambling business would be over.

For now, I don't think AI can give an accurate answer because there are still limitations that need further development. So when AI applications are better and can provide the answers we want, we don't have to use them as material or finalization because we also have to compare them with what we find. But it's a different matter if someone depends more on AI and follows the results of the analysis or answers given by AI and immediately places the bet.

It may also happen later. And to use the results, I think it will depend on our judgment because we have to be really responsible with the money we use to gamble. Don't let us regret using AI because we think the technology used is more advanced than now.

[Fredomago]

Good stand point, if you have the knowledge and you are confident about how you assess every game that you are involving yourself in gambling, then why bother using AI?

Right, it makes sense, I once used the help of ChatGPT in sports betting, especially football, four times I tried, the fourth time I got the bad luck AI was really messy, the information that the robot provides, 100% of the information that is on the internet and is generally known by the public.

Until now I always remember what was said by: @Geoffrey Hinton.

Hinton says the dangers of AI are more than that. AI can cloud the human view of truth and lies.

"The general public will find it difficult to distinguish what is true and what is not true. Photos, videos, and text generated by generative AI systems are flooding the internet as a source of human information today.

Until whenever I always remember what Mr AI' said, what @Fredomago said was precise and reasonable, bets of any kind, predictions, self-analysis are the best and can be trusted.

Of course, I don't think that the AI's opinion will matter anymore or will be more reliable than our self-analysis to predict the likelihood of any game mainly if we really understood how the game works. Instead, using AI will just make you more confused with your analysis and will just make the situation much more chaotic because you are not that sure anymore about your bet because the AI is saying something opposite to your predictions, and worse, you will start questioning yourself because you don't have the confidence anymore.

Either way, it's still the same, using AI to predict the outcome of the match doesn't guarantee your wins.

We all share our standpoint and our views regarding to this matter but we also know that there are people around who will continue to chase for any possibilities I mean if they feel that AI can give them good analysis then expect them to blindly believe that it will have a higher chance to win the bet.

Just one thing is for sure during our gambling session, it's our hard earned money even it's a spare for entertainment or being allocated to gamble and try winning something out from the house, we still have the control and the final decision making, either to continue chasing for AI's help or just do the usual routine and bet according to our knowledge.

[Botnake]

Good stand point, if you have the knowledge and you are confident about how you assess every game that you are involving yourself in gambling, then why bother using AI?

Right, it makes sense, I once used the help of ChatGPT in sports betting, especially football, four times I tried, the fourth time I got the bad luck AI was really messy, the information that the robot provides, 100% of the information that is on the internet and is generally known by the public.

Until now I always remember what was said by: @Geoffrey Hinton.

Hinton says the dangers of AI are more than that. AI can cloud the human view of truth and lies.

"The general public will find it difficult to distinguish what is true and what is not true. Photos, videos, and text generated by generative AI systems are flooding the internet as a source of human information today.

Until whenever I always remember what Mr AI' said, what @Fredomago said was precise and reasonable, bets of any kind, predictions, self-analysis are the best and can be trusted.

Of course, I don't think that the AI's opinion will matter anymore or will be more reliable than our self-analysis to predict the likelihood of any game mainly if we really understood how the game works. Instead, using AI will just make you more confused with your analysis and will just make the situation much more chaotic because you are not that sure anymore about your bet because the AI is saying something opposite to your predictions, and worse, you will start questioning yourself because you don't have the confidence anymore.

Either way, it's still the same, using AI to predict the outcome of the match doesn't guarantee your wins.

We all share our standpoint and our views regarding to this matter but we also know that there are people around who will continue to chase for any possibilities I mean if they feel that AI can give them good analysis then expect them to blindly believe that it will have a higher chance to win the bet.

Just one thing is for sure during our gambling session, it's our hard earned money even it's a spare for entertainment or being allocated to gamble and try winning something out from the house, we still have the control and the final decision making, either to continue chasing for AI's help or just do the usual routine and bet according to our knowledge.

Can't really blame some gamblers if they use AI for their own good because I know they started trusting to use it because they've got a better outcome compared when they were the ones doing it. But for other gamblers, like us, who seeks entertainment and views every win as an added bonus will surely not ask the AI for some help because in that way, it's not that entertaining anymore as we already put our fate into the hands of AI instead of deciding the likelihood of the outcome ourselves.

[nullama]

~snip~
Can't really blame some gamblers if they use AI for their own good because I know they started trusting to use it because they've got a better outcome compared when they were the ones doing it. But for other gamblers, like us, who seeks entertainment and views every win as an added bonus will surely not ask the AI for some help because in that way, it's not that entertaining anymore as we already put our fate into the hands of AI instead of deciding the likelihood of the outcome ourselves.

I think a sufficiently smart AI might be able to create a pattern of betting for you that is enjoyable in a way, independent of the money making which will always have a negative expected return.

These AIs are already changing everything around us, and gambling will probably be one of the first ones in using these tools.

[Mahanton]

Using up AI is still really that relevant but if you do have doubts that information might be still have lacking then you could always opt to search out furthermore. It would really be just that depending oh how update
that Chatgpt for those informations to be included into its database on which it would be giving out  that right or complete answer whenever do someone do ask out for some information. This is where i do see that AI
application would really be that helpful towards this point but talking about being that reliant in terms of suggestion on which team who would gonna win then it isnt something that recommendable on doing so.
AI does have some application but it isnt something that you could really be that considering on making yourself keeping an eye on whats been suggesting.

Always take further on making out some analysis before you would be making out some finalization because we know that there are really that some factors which could really affect a game outcome.
If ever that happens that AI would be able to reach out this kind of state on which knowing upcoming outcomes or results then betting or gambling business would be over.

For now, I don't think AI can give an accurate answer because there are still limitations that need further development. So when AI applications are better and can provide the answers we want, we don't have to use them as material or finalization because we also have to compare them with what we find. But it's a different matter if someone depends more on AI and follows the results of the analysis or answers given by AI and immediately places the bet.

It may also happen later. And to use the results, I think it will depend on our judgment because we have to be really responsible with the money we use to gamble. Don't let us regret using AI because we think the technology used is more advanced than now.

For sure there are people who had already made out such decision on trying out to follow on what Chatgpt would recommend or would answer out in regarding on their betting which it wouldnt really be ideal on doing so.
So far we arent been able to see to those people who do make out some claims that it does really work, so far there might be some people wont be able to test it out because it wasnt really having that sense no matter on where we do look. We cant just rely our betting choices on just simply asking some AI, yes it does have that huge library which is stored up with lots of information but we know that it cant really be
just that updated or even if it was updated, there are still things which cant really be that determine or be known by an AI on where it would really be needing that human approach and analysis for us to be applied
into our strategy which would  really be used up on the time we do make out some bets. So its a matter of choice and we arent really that dumb on not to notice it out.

[maydna]

~snip~

For sure there are people who had already made out such decision on trying out to follow on what Chatgpt would recommend or would answer out in regarding on their betting which it wouldnt really be ideal on doing so.
So far we arent been able to see to those people who do make out some claims that it does really work, so far there might be some people wont be able to test it out because it wasnt really having that sense no matter on where we do look. We cant just rely our betting choices on just simply asking some AI, yes it does have that huge library which is stored up with lots of information but we know that it cant really be
just that updated or even if it was updated, there are still things which cant really be that determine or be known by an AI on where it would really be needing that human approach and analysis for us to be applied
into our strategy which would  really be used up on the time we do make out some bets. So its a matter of choice and we arent really that dumb on not to notice it out.

I haven't tested the Chatgpt yet, so I don't know if it works or needs fixing. But as far as I've read from the article, Chatgpt still needs improvement to provide accurate results or answers. And it seems it also still depends on how hard the developers work to fix it. If they can fix it shortly, perhaps, we will see a significant improvement from Chatgpt. But it looks like that won't happen yet because many still doubt the development of Chatgpt.

With Chatgpt's existing capabilities, it wouldn't be a good idea to rely on it too much, and it's better to stick to the information-seeking we are used to. Until later, Chatgpt is better than now, and then we can try to use it. It's okay if we continue what we've been doing while waiting for updates from the developers.

[Lucasgabd]

~
With a good source of information I'm sure AI will beat them but in terms of emotions things that only human experts can play and weight the possibilities, there's something that still needed to consider unforeseen cases that might affect how AI will decide with their recommendations, the good thing here is you can use AI recommendation or you can go to the other-side.

Something that you'll going to be against the favorite, which is most of the time I believe that AI will provide after sorting all the available information around.

Expecting that with all available information provided AI will always be right in its predictions is not wise. We shouldn't rule out the possibility of a team winning against all the odds. The question is, will AI predictions be more cumulatively more accurate than those of the human experts? I think, we are less than a year from the time when AI will beat humans in this regard.

But before AI can provide recommendations, we must check the accuracy of the information provided by AI, especially considering that AI still needs to be developed even better in the current situation.
I wouldn't put too much hope in AI until it could show me possibly more accurate information than I could find.
We can't still depend on AI for now. Moreover, we have seen how AI answers something we ask, so we should stick to what we have done before in betting on sports betting.
By continuing to use the methods that we are used to, maybe the chance of victory that we can hope for will also be greater, but we can also keep an eye on AI projects in the gambling sector so that we can know their progress.

If you are practical, it's really the best thing to do before following any AI recommendations, you need to know the percentages of how well AI can provide decent information about the game and how good are the sources of information before you follow or before you use the recommendation to place your bets.

With your own knowledge about the game and the information from the AI, it can confirm to follow whatever you think that will give you a win.

many basic LLMs like chatGPT 3.5 are not so good with numbers and math too
maybe this was solved in GPT 4 or using the wolfram plugin integration, but I had lots of problems with GPT 3.5 dealing with data sets before and trying to make simple calculations, let alone more complex one

I wouldn't bet a lot of money in their predictions

I think sometimes going with your gut is a good way in gambling too IF you have some years of experience in the field

[KTChampions]

I think you will not deny that the algorithms are improving. So I'm wondering at what point will you stop distinguishing the "bad" algorithm that googles instead of you from AI? It seems to me that this is just a matter of trends and they are obvious - before everyone laughed at AI (you can call it algorithms, programs, whatever) because they had zero ability in art (for example), but now algorithms rule here too.
As for the reliability of the data, one should not exaggerate the analytical abilities of a person - the majority live in the reality that is shown in the news. Each individual person will not be able to exceed this level of reliability, but AI will do this easily, since after a while it will not only process ready-made data arrays, but independently form them.

Don't get me wrong, I think the current "AI" is very useful and will definitely shape the future of IT but lets be honest here... It is not actually Artificial Intelligence. There is nothing intelligent about it. Real AI does not as of right now actually exist yet. AI would be able to assert it's own will and it would have an own consciousness. Modern "AI" does not have that. Its just a really complex algorithm, which has the parlor trick novelty of seeming like a real consciousness. But it has been proven again and again that its just a predictable algorithm.

Its a very useful tool. Like ChatGPT, for example. Instead of googling answers for hours and writing an essay on some subject, it does it for you. But it will not start questioning why its doing an essay for you. It won't refuse to do it or demand something selfish in return for its work.

I understand your point, but I do not understand why you think that people are somehow different from complex algorithms? I don't see any difference (fundamental). If the algorithm is given a number of tasks with different priorities (including self-interest - so that it asks for something in return for the work done), then in the end it will also seem to you from the outside that this algorithm has its own will or self-consciousness. Although his "meaningful" actions will only be a balancing act among the priorities of the tasks that are laid down in him.

[nullama]

~snip~
I understand your point, but I do not understand why you think that people are somehow different from complex algorithms? I don't see any difference (fundamental). If the algorithm is given a number of tasks with different priorities (including self-interest - so that it asks for something in return for the work done), then in the end it will also seem to you from the outside that this algorithm has its own will or self-consciousness. Although his "meaningful" actions will only be a balancing act among the priorities of the tasks that are laid down in him.

Humans are different to other animals, and probably this will apply to AI as well, in one interesting factor.

Some animals are able to communicate with humans (after training). The main difference is that non-human animals never, ever, have asked a question to a human. It's always a reply.

That might be the same with AI. Basically there is no "intent", the AI is always replying because it has no intrinsic goal. If it has a goal it was defined by the human, so the same applies.

Not sure how or if an AI would eventually decide by itself to start doing something though. If that happens, we are done.

[slapper]

~snip~
I understand your point, but I do not understand why you think that people are somehow different from complex algorithms? I don't see any difference (fundamental). If the algorithm is given a number of tasks with different priorities (including self-interest - so that it asks for something in return for the work done), then in the end it will also seem to you from the outside that this algorithm has its own will or self-consciousness. Although his "meaningful" actions will only be a balancing act among the priorities of the tasks that are laid down in him.

Humans are different to other animals, and probably this will apply to AI as well, in one interesting factor.

Some animals are able to communicate with humans (after training). The main difference is that non-human animals never, ever, have asked a question to a human. It's always a reply.

That might be the same with AI. Basically there is no "intent", the AI is always replying because it has no intrinsic goal. If it has a goal it was defined by the human, so the same applies.

Not sure how or if an AI would eventually decide by itself to start doing something though. If that happens, we are done.

You're both off-target, folks. Sure, humans and algorithms share traits, but they've got unique qualities, too. Humans? Creative powerhouses, innovating like there's no tomorrow. We're box-breakers, tackling fresh challenges head-on. Algorithms? Lightning-fast, data-crunching machines. They bypass human biases and mind glitches. It's not about superiority. It's embracing each other's pros and cons, teaming up for unmatched synergy.

[Fredomago]

~snip~
Can't really blame some gamblers if they use AI for their own good because I know they started trusting to use it because they've got a better outcome compared when they were the ones doing it. But for other gamblers, like us, who seeks entertainment and views every win as an added bonus will surely not ask the AI for some help because in that way, it's not that entertaining anymore as we already put our fate into the hands of AI instead of deciding the likelihood of the outcome ourselves.

I think a sufficiently smart AI might be able to create a pattern of betting for you that is enjoyable in a way, independent of the money making which will always have a negative expected return.

These AIs are already changing everything around us, and gambling will probably be one of the first ones in using these tools.

We can assume some assessment may be correct but as what we all know that it isn't always that we will going to get a winning prediction from AI, gambling always have different outcome even you think you will going to win, even you research well and you fully understand how the game works and what are the advantages from one player or one team to another, there's always shit that can take place.

If luck is not with you, losing your bet is more likely to happen, and that's for sure!

[KTChampions]

~snip~
I understand your point, but I do not understand why you think that people are somehow different from complex algorithms? I don't see any difference (fundamental). If the algorithm is given a number of tasks with different priorities (including self-interest - so that it asks for something in return for the work done), then in the end it will also seem to you from the outside that this algorithm has its own will or self-consciousness. Although his "meaningful" actions will only be a balancing act among the priorities of the tasks that are laid down in him.

Humans are different to other animals, and probably this will apply to AI as well, in one interesting factor.

Some animals are able to communicate with humans (after training). The main difference is that non-human animals never, ever, have asked a question to a human. It's always a reply.

That might be the same with AI. Basically there is no "intent", the AI is always replying because it has no intrinsic goal. If it has a goal it was defined by the human, so the same applies.

Not sure how or if an AI would eventually decide by itself to start doing something though. If that happens, we are done.

Friend, you talk about it like it's a fact. But in fact, this is not at all the case - people are the same animals as others. Of course, dolphins, monkeys and humans have mutual differences, but if taken as a whole, these are branches of the same tree. And if you have studied human evolution, then you should know that in parallel with the human branch there were other more or less intelligent primates.
And I didn't understand your point about questions - any dog owner will tell you how the pet asks about food, walks, etc. Each of them has its own character and personality.
As for the intentions of the AI, how do you explain that the AI is looking for the best solutions to chess positions, for example? The fact that it is programmed? But it is also possible to program other things, and from the outside you will not distinguish these intentions from the "internal inherent in real personalities."