Commentator 2: Deep Blue! Kasparov, after move C4, resigned!
Jennifer: I’m Jennifer Strong, and this is I was there when—An oral history project that includes stories of breakthroughs and early moments in AI and computers, as told by people who witnessed them. In this episode, we meet the man on the other side of that chessboard, Garry Kasparov.
Garry Kasparov: It is inevitable that something is depicted on the cover of Newsweek as the last stand of the brain and in big books like the moon landing would involve a lot of myths. I admit that I myself got caught up in a lot of this hype. It took years of reflection and testing to sort out my impressions at the time and the truth. I wrote about this painful process in my 2017 book, Deeply think: When machine intelligence ends and human creativity begins, it’s easy for a chess machine. They don’t care if they win or lose. They don’t even know they’re playing chess. But as a world champion and human being, I had a lot of emotions sitting in front of a machine.
Garry Kasparov: Will it play like the previous machines or will it play like God? I’m used to reading my opponent’s body language. Not really helpful, sitting across from a computer engineer making moves he doesn’t understand for a machine he’s built. I am also used to thoroughly preparing my opponents based on previous matches and their trends. Against Deep Blue, this is also out of the window as they keep their training games secret. And of course they can upgrade its power and change its chess personality with a few keystrokes. If only I could. It’s hard to explain my experience because I was literally the first knowledge worker to be intimidated by a machine.
Garry Kasparov: Most of the AI and previous experience are hoaxes, or rather rudimentary. For example, the replacement of elevator operators by humans with push lifts was very disturbing to humans in the 1940s. In fact, the technology for automated elevators has existed for decades. century, but people are still afraid of them. Plus, advanced operators already have a strong alliance. Nowadays, there are many easy comparisons. Sit down across from Deep Blue in a completely normal way. I’ve been feeding at a chess board since I was six years old, and it’s technically a little different for me, but it’s completely different. I have a feeling most people would feel like the first time they stepped into a self-driving car or received a diagnosis from an AI doctor.
Garry Kasparov: These new wonders go beyond my arch-enemies. Of course, the machine I lost in the 1997 rematch, sometimes called the Deep Blue, is as smart as your alarm clock – a $10 million alarm clock, but not just like what previous generations imagined. This isn’t to downplay their achievement, it’s the computer’s Everest – to beat the world chess champion. There’s a reason it’s getting global attention. I just want to put into context what we mean by smart speech. Deep Blue did a great job with hundreds of professional leaders, but it was enough to compete for the world championship because the chess was deep but not deep enough. Deep Blue is not a chess tournament. It just played better in six games, and brute force analysis at fast speeds turned out to be enough. It took me a while to absorb the most important lessons of my loss, and they had nothing to do with chess or anything to do with the future of human-machine relations.
Garry Kasparov: The time period in which we compete with intelligent machines is very small, almost insignificant, but we place so much importance on it instead of the superiority of the machines that replace it later, that is really important thing. For example, AI automation replaces human work and has a brief moment of performance parity with humans. But that doesn’t last and forever machines will do it better, cheaper and safer. It is human progress. It makes our lives better. This is nothing to worry about for those who have lost their jobs, and even there, this study after research shows that industries with more automation and AI work better with more jobs. more work and higher wages. The alternative is stagnation.