Ke Jie is an arrogant 18 year old and he's been saying on social network in the past couple days how he will defeat AlphaGo.

Swimming. It used to be that swimmers were supposed to be streamlined and avoid bulky muscles. Then a weightlifter decided he wanted to swim. Swimmers today all lift weights.

Programming. It used to be that people built programs in a very top down, heavily planned way. Think waterfall. We now understand that a highly iterative process is more appropriate in most areas of programming.

Expert systems. It used to be that we would develop expert systems (machine translation, competitive games, etc) through building large sets of explicit rules based on what human experts thought would work. Today we start with simple systems, large data sets, and use a variety of machine learning algorithms to let the program figure out its own rules. (One of the giant turning points there was when Google Translate completely demolished all existing translation software.)

Nowadays, top players slug it out baseline-to-baseline.

In terms of stance, we were taught to hit from a rotated position where your shoulder faces the net, and a normal vector from your chest points to either the left or right side of the court.

Nowadays, it's much more common to hit from an "open" position, where your body is facing the net, not turned. This would have been considered "unprepared" or poor footwork in my day, but it actually allows for greater reach. It does make it more difficult to hit a hard shot, but that's made up for by racquet technology and generally stronger players.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/sports/playmagazine/20fede...

Although it takes a few paragraphs until it gets into the details of "today's power-baseline game."

Which is a curious point. The gripes about early brute force search algorithms (e.g. Deep Blue?) were that they felt unnature.

However, as the searches get more nuanced and finely grained, is there a point at which a fast machine begins doing fast stupid machine things quickly enough to feel smart?

Are there any chess / Go analogs of the Turing test? Or is a computer players always still recognizable at a high level?

A Turing test for game players is an interesting idea, it would be useful for designing game players that are good sparring partners rather than brutes that can whipe the floor with you.

As for JKD, people are drawn in by its oriental esotericism, but there's no evidence it is an especially effective fighting style, or that it has something that (kick)boxing does not.