In May 1997, the then world chess champion Garry Kasparov lost confrontation in a series of six matches against Deep Blue, a computer system developed by IBM that had been defeated by him the year before.
Almost 30 years later, Kasparov estimates that, with the current stage of development of artificial intelligence, machines are today much superior to humans in a board match.
But it points out that even if with increasingly reduced chances, humans still have a small likelihood of beating robots.
“There is always a space, even relatively small, where human intuition, human understanding, human creativity can become a decisive factor,” Kasparov told Sheet.
For him, however, the age of competition between humans and machines is left behind. The chess born in Azerbaijan has argued that the focus now must be in the union of forces, focused on the development of research that helps solve humanity problems.
Considered the largest chess player in history by specialized publications, Kasparov is in Brazil to promote the Grand Chess Tour finals, an international plaid circuit that helped found in 2015. The tournament takes place this Saturday (27) until next Friday (3), in São Paulo, WTC.
Some of the world’s leading players, such as the American Caruana, third in the world, and Indian Rameshbabu Praggananandhaa, fourth are This is the first time that the finals are held in Latin America, with a total award of US $ 350,000 (R $ 1.9 million).
His matches against Deep Blue in 1996 and 1997 were emblematic moments in the history of sport. Almost 30 years later, mr. Do you believe that the human being is still able to face and defeat artificial intelligence? We are already far beyond the competition stage. It is not a matter of competing, but of collaborating. Any game, any kind of activity that has patterns, rules and calculations, is a territory that machines dominate, which does not mean that we should stop doing so. We simply have to take into account the new information available. Thanks to computers, we understand chess better than before.
But the key point is that by interacting with computers, whether in chess, GO, poker or any other game, we are collecting very important and useful data to apply to proper research. For example, the Deepmind project, conducted by Demis Hassabis and his team, under Google’s umbrella, began with the development of new gaming algorithms and ended a Nobel Prize for Protein Studies. This is where I believe that man-machine collaboration could be tested more effectively using games. The chess was a pioneering field. And I was, in a way, the first human knowledge worker who had his job directly threatened by a machine.
Is there any aspect of chess where humans are still better than machines? This is not a chess. It is vital to understand that, in most cases, in the overwhelming majority of cases, machines can make better decisions. But there is always a space, even relatively small, where human intuition, human understanding, human creativity can become a decisive factor. The secret to being successful is to recognize what type of human contribution you can add to a specific machine to a specific problem. It is not a matter of competing, but of seeking the more effective synergy.
Can the development of artificial intelligence pose a risk to the future of humanity? This debate is very old. Sometimes I remember people that the first passionate speech against the machines was given in Britain in London, in the Lordes House in 1812, by none other than Lord Gordon Byron. In a way, it was the manifesto of the Luditas who opposed the machines. As machines historically destroyed traditional industries in agriculture or manufacturing, they have always created new opportunities. But by creating new opportunities, they destroyed old industries.
If we look at the history of humanity, machines have always created disruption and helped us seek new levels. The only difference now is that it is not about agriculture, manufacturing, it is not about physical strength or speed. It is thought. These are cognitive skills. But if you stop thinking about cognitive skills as sacred, you will see the same pattern. I believe we are gaining a phenomenal force that can help us make us smarter and also make our maximum potential.
How has artificial intelligence contributed to the development of chess in recent years? Machines have made a tremendous contribution because, on the one hand, they have changed the way professional players prepare for the game, because you simply can’t imagine any preparation without computers today. But it has also changed the emphasis of very aggressive openings for slower development because you don’t want to be a victim of a higher analysis. This is why the emphasis moved to the middle of the game. It is a natural instinct of survival of the best players. They still make some risky plays, but rarely.
In addition, it has helped more people get involved, because now you can do a good research even without being a very strong player, without the help of a great team. But the most important and positive thing happened at the base of the chess pyramid. Because today you can have millions of people watching the Magnus carlsen game [ex-campeão mundial] and Fabiano Caruana, for example, without even expecting a professional commentator to intervene. You can see exactly on the screen if Magnus made a good or bad move.
Even though it is very annoying, because sometimes it is annoying to feel that people can look at the machine and criticize Magnus carlsen, I understand that it helps the game gain popularity. Now you can watch from your office, sitting in your chair, even though you are a mediocre player, but you know exactly what is happening there, which is critical. It has always been a big challenge for the chess game, because people watched the game, but they didn’t understand, so they had to wait for the comment. And often the commentators were very shy to criticize the great champions. Now it’s the machine, you press the button and you know everything.
In August 2023, FIDE banned the participation of transgender players in women’s competitions for a supposed male advantage in the sport. What is the opinion of mr. Regarding the ban? Chess was lucky, I’m not aware that this problem exists in the chess game. As for other sports, I still think there are male and female sports. And I don’t think you should mix these things. If there are transgender players, I think you might consider another category. But I think bringing them to female chess is not a good idea.
Judit Polgár was the only woman to appear on the top 10 of the world ranking. Do men tend to play better than women? Why? It looks like yes. There were few exceptions. Judit Polgár was a unique player, which proves that it is not impossible for a player. But so far no one has come close. Perhaps it is because of the competitive spirit. I think it probably has something to do with the long traditions of society. If something continues to repeat itself over the centuries, it is not possible to change everything instantly. Exceptions like Judit Polgár show that it is possible. But traditions and society are preventing this from becoming common.
X-ray | Garry Kasparov, 62
Born on April 13, 1963 in Baku, then Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan, part of today’s extinct Soviet Union, was the youngest world chess champion at the age of 22 in 1985. He kept the title until 2000. Five years later, he retired from Professional Chess. In 2015, it helped found the Grand Chess Tour, an international circuit sponsored by Saint Louis Chess Club and the Superbet Foundation.
