I'm sorry, I know this is a shitpost, but I've played seemingly hundreds of games of tic-tac-toe against Google Assistant and I've come to the conclusion that it's just not humanly possible to win. You will lose, or, more likely, It will be a draw.

If I have a chip on my shoulder when the robots take over, it will be because of this and this alone.

Seriously if you've beaten Assistant then someone probably needs to send Deckard out to retire you, because you're not human.

Edit: Y'all can go to hell man...

I had this conversation with a friend of mine recently, during which we noticed we cannot really tell why Go is a more complex game than Tic-tac-toe.

Imagine a type of TTT which is played on a 19x19 board; the players play regular TTT on the central 3x3 square of the board until one of them wins or there is a draw, if a move is made outside of the square before that, the player who makes it loses automatically. We further modify the game by saying even when the victor is already known, the game terminates only after the players fill the whole 19x19 board with their pawns.

Now take Atari Go (Go played till the first capture, the one who captures wins). Assume it's played on a 19x19 board like Go typically is, with the difference that, just like in TTT above, even after the capture the pawns are placed until the board is full.

I like to model both as directed graphs of states, where the edges are moves. Final states (without outgoing moves) have scores attached to them (-1, 0, 1), the score goes to the player that started their turn in such a node, the other player gets the opposite result (resulting in a 0 sum game).

Now -- both games have the same state space, so the question is:
(1) why TTT is simple while optimal Go play seems to require a brute-force search through the state space?
(2) what value or property would express the fact that one of those games is simpler?