Is she a bot?

From the game, when I move, she respond nearly immidiately. So, I wonder if is she a bot?

Their profile ( says they are a bot.


Haha, finally I beat the bot. :smile:


Is it necessary for the bot owner to identify the account as a bot?

The userid should identify it as a bot so it is not necessary to look up the profile to know it. For example, at KGS IdiotBot [30k] or at DGS LeelaBot19 [3d].

1 Like

Perhaps the top left online indicator could be replaced with the letters “AI” for bots. Or their rank show as [1dAI]. Something along those lines. So it’s clear on the game screen itself that one/both players are bots.


My thought was that the bot be identified as such in lists where gams are offered, etc. Certainly an opponent should know before starting a game. Remembering that AlphaGo made some rather unusual moves, knowing that it came from a bot is relevant and significant. Similarly, some bots may do things a human might not and a human might choose a better move.

When I started here I was seeing alerts about games by RoyalLeela. I thought this was a person. I sent a message to it asking why I got the alerts and got a reply from a person. Only later did a friend tell me it is a bot. I do not think that sort of ambiguity should exist.

If the usrids can’t be used to ID them, something else should that appears wherever (or almost everywhere) the userid does.

1 Like

Is it really that important? AlphaGo’s unexpected moves are relevant because it’s the first program that can beat top pros. A bot playing at amateur levels doesn’t add anything to Go culture. And bots number in, what, the tens at most on OGS? Why do we need new regulations on such a tiny, benign group?

I suspect that no one playing (or some time capable of playing) at the higher ranges of professional strength add anything to Go culture. In fact maybe before long no humans will have anything to add, period. What does that have to do with telling players this fact; the profile provides the options identify real name, websites, a player’s country which can be totally ficticious. In fact there are more non-country (e.g., NATO), fictitious and silly “countries” than bots. None of this has much of anything to do with Go and is completely irrelevant to a player’s Go playing.

If you visit KGS you will often find more games on offer in Open Games by bots than humans. The OGS Change Log only goes back to 2014. KGS and DGS were operating 14+ years ago. How long for IGS and the Korean sites? I don’t know what the community sizes, their characteristics and bot populations are. How does OGS rank as a competitor and magnet?

One good reason thinking about regulations is to do it before bots are not a small, benign group. If you wait you can have a problem that is bigger and harder to solve. Then there may be the excuse that nothing can be done because it has become unwieldy, we’ll just have to live with it. Bots can put very different demands on the server.

In terms of time settings, it is unfair for a human to play with a bot unless the bot’s response is throttled to play at roughly the same rate as a human in the type of game being played. It makes a difference if a human can be faced with a real time problem but the bot can’t.


I opened an issue for this on github.

See also


Mark’s suggestions are:

  1. The name can be displayed in gray rather than blue;
  2. The flag can be replaced with a bot icon; (why do bots have a nationality anyway?)
  3. The letters “AI” or “CPU” or “BOT” can be added after the rank, like how “T” stands for timeout;
  4. The word “AI” or “CPU” or “BOT” can be added to the blank space to the right of the user icon.

Presumably bots must be registered as such with OGS? Note that Chat and Message also should be modified.

My opinion is not (1) because color has no significance viz a viz bots and which theme is in use might matter. Also, in terms of color there can be diminished sensitivity even to blue and the appearance of colors can be effected by the surround, and apps such as f.Lux which change screen temperature. (Apple has one on iOS that’s now been put in OS X).

(2) is a clever idea, I really liked it and then it occurred to me that it might be of significance to the bot owner to associate the bot with a nation. Also, s below, there are pages where it’s appropriate to display something but there is no flag.

(3 & 4) For reference when thinking about these two, I attached Day and Night themes versions of all the pages where the area(s) I think Mark is referring to appear. Looking at all of them, there may be some limitations on certain pages… (If I picked wrong areas, tell me and I’ll re-do it.)

Home page, upper right:

Home page, gobans:

Game page, Note Chat. Note that the flags (circled) are tiny.:

Watch page:

Profile page:

Play page:

Excuse me, I know everyone is now busy about how to identify a bot on OGS. I support to make the project done and I believe it’s going to be a big issue also.

However, let me raise a new issue: Should a bot be able to act like a human account?

Let me give some explainations.
Imagine if a bot can

  • create games,
  • accept human’s challenge games,
  • join a tournament,
    and any other unexpected things?
    One bot on OGS doesn’t that much matter. But if one bot can do, every bots can. Then, imagine if there’re that many bots happens in reality. Is that a disaster? Is that viruses?

So, in my opinion this issue is important also. Please tell me how you think about this would be appreciated. Also please tell me if I should create a new topic.

[quote=“Aten, post:8, topic:11433”]
I suspect that no one playing (or some time capable of playing) at the higher ranges of professional strength add anything to Go culture.[/quote]

Considering professional Go players (and now also AlphaGo) set the trends in what folks play, I suspect you are wrong.

A valid concern. More valid than “I got confused.” But moving goalposts aside, how does requiring new identifiers for bots prevent it? That you can see at a glance on KGS a preponderance of them suggests identification is not the problem.

@PtoP’s suggestions on restrictions for bots’ behaviors, if they don’t already exist, are reasonable. If the problem is mistakenly playing bots, why not just make it so that the only way to do so is by creating a challenge against a computer?

Well, sorry if my explaination is not clear. I mean nowadays bots do already exist. And OGS already allows human to create a challenge against a computer. Er… I must edit the post to…

Cuz it’s really annoying to see bots create challenges itself.

So, OGS should restrict bots’ behaviors. Bots should only use when humans create a game against a computer.


What gave you the impression I don’t think bots already exist? I was agreeing with you.

I agree people shouldn’t end up with matches vs bots without intentionally choosing to play a bot. This is why I’ve never had RoyalLeela post open challenges, accept open challenges, or join tournaments/ladders. The operator of Kyu Player clearly has different beliefs though, as seen by posting open challenge games a human might join without realizing it isn’t a human opponent.


You’re to be commended for choosing to operate responsibly with the interests of the community in mind. Others may not and that is why it becomes necessary to impose some controls that do not amount to crossing one’s fingers and hoping the bot owner will be nice.

Your practices could be a useful standard for all bot operators to meet.

1 Like

If AlphaGo is established as the permanent, undefeatable Go champion, what will the top humans be contributing? If you mean that celebrities are opinion makers and fashion trendsetters, I wouldn’t disagree. Probably a vast majority of players are aping moves they’ve seen celebrities play without really having a good - or even any - idea why to do it.

Let’s get straight to the issue. You are making arguments about why you think the idea of identifying bots is bad and should not be bothered with.

Why are you opposed to it? What is your positive argument for why it is better to hide or obscure the identity of the player as a bot?

It has already been accepted that there are a variety of negative consequences. If you can’t make a convincing case for why we are better off not knowing, what is your point?

If a control was put in place that bots accounts aren’t able to accept or post open challenges I’d have no problems with that. That’s up to management though. :slight_smile:

Isn’t it basically racism? Branding bots? Forcing them to wear a symbol of shame? :smiley: might be in a couple of years…

But I agree. At first I had no idea what you guys are blabbering about, until I read to the part that bots can actually create their own challenges. I had no idea! That’s weird… At least make it obvious in the game name or something (if you are a bot owner) Or teach them bots to chat first, I like at least a few lines of dialogue exchanged before the game :wink:

1 Like

Explanations in human terms I guess??? :smiley: And reviews? And opponents and culture and fun? (I for one am not gonna be watching alphago vs itself matches.) And new ideas and glimpses of hope that Alphago may still be beaten?

A king is nothing without a kingdom to rule…