There was another way to look at this event, of course. A group of computer scientists and chess experts had undertaken a challenge almost as old as the computer itself and succeeded after years of brilliant work. From that angle, the historic parallels were the Lindbergh flight, the Apollo moon launch or Alexander Graham Bell’s first message unit. Certainly, this was the way the Deep Blue team leader, C. J. Tan, would have us view the event. ““Everybody a winner,’’ he says. But that Panglossian sentiment does not hold, not with chess matches, and not with the march of technology. Deep Blue’s victory will indeed stand as a definitive marker in the progress of the Information Age, and a stunning human achievement - but the lasting memory will come from the battered visage of the formerly un- defeated King of Chess, at once disconsolate and defiant. Beaten by a machine.
Kasparov’s very participation in the match was a brave and risky act, as bold as one of his classic sacrifices on the chessboard. Some benefits were assured. The tremendous attention generated by the match would certainly boost interest in his sport. And he would benefit computer science by acting as a human benchmark testing the Blue team’s innovative techniques. But to personally reap the advantages from this gambit (beyond collecting his share of the $1.1 million purse), he had to win. He assumed he would. ““I don’t lose,’’ he told me before the match. ““I never lost a big battle. I believe I have an ability, the experience, the energy to resist this challenge.''
What went wrong? In part, hubris. Kasparov’s strategy was dependent on exploiting weaknesses from which all previous computer programs had suffered. But Deep Blue’s creators had openly discussed the most important piece of information its competitors should know: they had successfully plugged those vulnerabilities. Before the match, when I told Kasparov about this claim, he responded with withering derision. ““This is crap!’’ he said. The first game seemed to prove him out. But in game two, Deep Blue unfurled a commanding - and breathtakingly humanlike - attack, not only winning the game but demolishing Kasparov’s psyche. Before his eyes, Deep Blue had proved that it could do what he had considered undoable. From that moment, ““game two was sitting in my mind,’’ he says, and that specter ultimately brought him down.
Even now, Kasparov clings to a bizarre suspicion: the printouts documenting Deep Blue’s thought process could reveal evidence that the machine’s triumph was unearned. ““Provide the answers!’’ he says, addressing IBM as if the corporation itself looms over him. ““You owe the world of chess and the world of science an explanation. I will be the first to applaud you when I see what’s really happening behind the curtain.''
At IBM’s Watson Research Center (where HOME OF DEEP BLUE banners are now posted), the Blue team is quite properly enjoying its victory. They resist any implication that their feat diminishes humanity in general or Kasparov in particular. Ask them what this moment means, and they speak in terms of increased computer power - and the spirit of humanity itself. ““If we can do this, we can do anything,’’ says Feng-Hsiung Hsu, who has been working on computer chess for more than a decade.
It is a comforting message, one echoed in op-ed pages across the country, where essays are penned to remind us that Deep Blue does not ““think,’’ that Deep Blue can’t cross the street by itself, that Deep Blue took as little satisfaction from its win as does an espresso machine after producing a perfect latte. All true, but so what? A refrigerator doesn’t think, either, but if one hits you on the head it still hurts. The importance of Deep Blue’s victory is what it symbolizes, and to many it is this: computers are changing our lives with both a rapidity and a thoroughness that are beyond our control. Computer technology is a boon. But you don’t have to be a Luddite to realize that not every change will be for the best.
That is why our hearts go out to Garry Kasparov. The rematch he demands cannot undo the history made last week. But if the John Henry of our time could somehow vanquish what will undoubtedly be an even smarter version of Deep Blue, his victory could give a lift to all of us who endure voice-mail hell, or Windows error messages, or pink slips because their jobs have been automated. ““Man versus machine, the match is not over,’’ says Kasparov. ““I believe I have a noble cause to defend.’’ Last week was for posterity. Next time, it’s personal.
