While it is to a degree true, it is also worth noting that the stockfish vs alphazero matches did get criticism for various reasons.
The one I remember most was that alphazero was running on a supercomputer, while it's opponents didn't get that luxury. This is said to be why alphazero didn't make it far when put on similar hardware as other ais.
The other criticism I remember was from stockfish's dev saying that the settings they have for stockfish where suboptimal, most notably they had a set 1 minute think time per turn. This is apparently not how stockfish works, because like a human player it will also calculate on which turns it will spend its time thinking.
So while alphazero may very well be better, there's not really a way to confirm this with these matches sadly. The matches whet still helpful to the chess community, though. Definitely still worth checking out
At runtime, both the Stockfish and AlphaZero agents were given equivalent hardware, which was a standard commercial CPU. There were no super computers involved there.
I think what you might be mistakenly thinking of is, with some articles erroneously reporting when the games/paper were first publicly released, the fact that training a model of AlphaZero requires a considerable amount of self-play that takes up a lot of compute cycles.
It’s important to make the distinction between training and inference time here though. For the analogous comparison to how Stockfish works, it has been trained for more than a decade now with humans iteratively refining and manually creating features and strategies. The primary achievement of what Alphazero represents, is that it was able to train itself completely independent of humans and come up entirely with its own features/strategies.
At inference time too though, we see a large increase in benefit for AlphaZero against Stockfish. As even though both agents had exactly the same hardware and time allotted, AlphaZero is far more efficient at exploring its search space due to the value/pruning function it learned by itself through training. Stockfish also has its own value and pruning functions, but because of the fundamental nature of how expert systems work, it’s very difficult to create generalized features that address every possible variable. That’s the other benefit of training a model to learn things itself through self-play as opposed to manually engineering the features ourselves by hand. This is why AlphaZero performed far better than StockFish here given the same time, and one of the reasons why it was deemed to be more “human-like”. Because as humans we don’t brute force possible moves, but rather immediately discount a large majority of plays and focus in on a very small subset that we know to be the optimal path to go towards, all through a sort of ingrained “intuition” built up over the countless games we’ve played.
I hope I was able to help clarify things with this short summary, and if you’re interested, I definitely recommend reading the paper itself for more in depth detail/information! You can find it freely available here at: https://deepmind.com/documents/260/alphazero_preprint.pdf
Those criticisms arose from the preprint - the timing criticism (at least) was resolved in the final paper - both sides were given 3 hours (+ 15s increment).
I might be reading this wrong, but I believe this isn't about movement between EU members, but rather the requirements for states outside of the European union.
As an EU citizen you won't have any restrictions, but the rest of the world, including the UK, will have to get these e-visas.
The other part only pertains to the USA, where they make certain EU members get a visa and the EU is arguing that the EU should as a whole treat the USA in the same manner, give them visas.
So I don't believe this stated they would put up extra barriers between EU nations, only external nations.
Pixabay is a site that works similar to unsplash, but added a video section a short while ago. Not entirely sure if Stocksnap and Pexels have done so too.
Another area where this seems to be happening is with fonts at places like Fontsquirrel and Open Font Library.
The one I remember most was that alphazero was running on a supercomputer, while it's opponents didn't get that luxury. This is said to be why alphazero didn't make it far when put on similar hardware as other ais.
The other criticism I remember was from stockfish's dev saying that the settings they have for stockfish where suboptimal, most notably they had a set 1 minute think time per turn. This is apparently not how stockfish works, because like a human player it will also calculate on which turns it will spend its time thinking.
So while alphazero may very well be better, there's not really a way to confirm this with these matches sadly. The matches whet still helpful to the chess community, though. Definitely still worth checking out