Glad to announce that the paper discussed in this previous post, entitled "Idealizations of Uncertainty and Lessons from Artificial Intelligence" is now fully accepted by the online journal Economics. I want to thank the reviewers, and my colleague David Tuckett, for their invaluable contributions that have made this a much better paper.Some of you will be interested to know I've made added brief comments to the paper about AlphaGo, Google's program that beat a human master player in 4 out of 5 games. I hope to get time to write a more thorough blog post on AlphaGo.The hype around this "breakthrough" is driving me insane. I've read the full academic paper, and I believe I can can easily explain what the program does.For now, just know that AlphaGo is just massive computation to assign numerical values to board configurations (based on computer game playing math that originated in the late 50s), then massive lookahead through those numbers, to come up with good moves, nothing more. To use words like "intuition" to describe what it is doing (as was done in Forbes) is the worst sort of wishful mnemonics. The fact that one of the programmers of AlphaGo used this word is self-deluded and misleading, and the fact that Forbes presented that statement without critical evaluation just shows how people aren't really thinking about what it means for machine to "think".I must finish my book, and soon.