Can a bot settle the luck/skill argument?

[TreyWilly]

There's an article here about how a bot programmed by the University of Alberta will play Phil Laak and Ali Eslami for 50K over 2,000 hands.

Kind of disturbing. Hope Laak and Eslami crush it. Whatever.

But the article got me thinking about what a successful bot could do for the luck/skill argument. If programmers could successfully build a computer that could play optimally and crush the best human opponents, wouldn't that prove that poker was, in fact, a game where skill dominates?

Such a development would be bittersweet, of course. I don't want such a bot to exist. But the exhibition could possibly lead the way for more states to accept the luck/skill argument, and thus create more B&M options.

Just a thought ...