This comment, that AlphaGo showed "creativity", seems so ridiculous to me. Alphago is operating purely on bayesian statistics (with very good priors) so it's decisions are exactly the opposite of creativity.
If it seems ridiculous to you, that's a good signal that you'd get a lot out of digging into philosophy of mind.
Where do our thoughts come from? Creativity? Is it so preposterous that these too arise from probabilistic electrical storms - but in wet matter as opposed to hard?
Where thoughts come from may be too complex for us to model now, maybe ever. But if you look deep enough, I think you'll find at heart deterministic processes driven by networks that were trained through nature + nurture.
Maybe creativity is less ethereal than we perceive. Maybe it would benefit us to start considering how non-sentient intelligence can achieve it.
Reminds me of a quip about Richard Feynman that he'd spend many hours honing a new way of doing a physics problem, but carefully present it as if he just did it off handed. So we just need to link human brains with cybernetic implants to compete. ;)
Of course I still made something up.