back to indexGarry Kasparov: Chess, Deep Blue, AI, and Putin | Lex Fridman Podcast #46
link |
The following is a conversation with Gary Kasparov.
link |
He's considered by many to be the greatest chess player
link |
From 1986 until his retirement in 2005,
link |
he dominated the chess world,
link |
ranking world number one for most of those 19 years.
link |
While he has many historical matches
link |
against human chess players,
link |
in the long arc of history he may be remembered
link |
for his match against the machine, IBM's Deep Blue.
link |
His initial victories and eventual loss to Deep Blue
link |
captivated the imagination of the world,
link |
of what role artificial intelligence systems may play
link |
in our civilization's future.
link |
That excitement inspired an entire generation
link |
of AI researchers, including myself,
link |
to get into the field.
link |
Gary is also a pro democracy political thinker and leader,
link |
a fearless human rights activist,
link |
and author of several books,
link |
including How Life Imitates Chess,
link |
which is a book on strategy and decision making,
link |
which is a book articulating his opposition
link |
to the Putin regime,
link |
and Deep Thinking,
link |
which is a book on the role
link |
of both artificial intelligence and human intelligence
link |
in defining our future.
link |
This is the Artificial Intelligence Podcast.
link |
If you enjoy it, subscribe on YouTube,
link |
give it five stars on iTunes,
link |
support it on Patreon,
link |
or simply connect with me on Twitter
link |
at Lex Friedman, spelled F R I D M A N.
link |
And now, here's my conversation with Gary Kasparov.
link |
As perhaps the greatest chess player of all time,
link |
when you look introspectively at your psychology
link |
throughout your career,
link |
what was the bigger motivator,
link |
the love of winning or the hatred of losing?
link |
Have to confess I never heard it before,
link |
which is again, congratulations.
link |
It's quite an accomplishment.
link |
Losing was always painful.
link |
For me, it was almost like a physical pain
link |
because I knew that if I lost the game,
link |
it's just because I made a mistake.
link |
So I always believed that the result of the game
link |
had to be decided by the quality of my play.
link |
Okay, you may say it sounds arrogant,
link |
but it helped me to move forward
link |
because I always knew that there was room for improvement.
link |
Was there the fear of the mistake?
link |
Actually, fear of mistake guarantees mistakes.
link |
And the difference between top players at the very top
link |
is that it's the ability to make a decision
link |
without predictable consequences.
link |
You don't know what's happening.
link |
It's just intuitively.
link |
I can go this way or that way.
link |
And there are always hesitations.
link |
People are like, you are just at the crossroad.
link |
You can go right, you can go left, you can go straight.
link |
You can turn and go back.
link |
And the consequences are just very uncertain.
link |
Yes, you have certain ideas what happens on the right
link |
or on the left or on just if you go straight,
link |
but it's not enough to make well calculated choice.
link |
And when you play chess at the very top,
link |
it's about your inner strength.
link |
So I can make this decision.
link |
I will stand firm and I'm not going to waste my time
link |
because I have full confidence that I will go through.
link |
Going back to your original question is,
link |
I would say neither.
link |
It's just, it's love for winning, hate for losing.
link |
There were important elements, psychological elements,
link |
but the key element, I would say the driving force
link |
was always my passion for making a difference.
link |
It's just, I can move forward and I can always,
link |
I can always enjoy not just playing,
link |
but creating something new.
link |
Creating something new.
link |
How do you think about that?
link |
It's just finding new ideas in the openings,
link |
some original plan in the middle game.
link |
It's actually, that helped me to make the transition
link |
from the game of chess where I was on the very top
link |
to another life where I knew I would not be number one.
link |
I would not be necessarily on the top,
link |
but I could still be very active and productive
link |
by my ability to make a difference,
link |
by influencing people, say joining the democratic movement
link |
in Russia or talking to people
link |
about human machine relations.
link |
There's so many things where I knew my influence
link |
may not be as decisive as in chess,
link |
but still strong enough to help people
link |
to make their choices.
link |
So you can still create something new
link |
that makes a difference in the world outside of chess.
link |
But wait, you've kind of painted a beautiful picture
link |
of your motivations in chess to create something new,
link |
to look for those moments of some brilliant new ideas.
link |
But were you haunted by something?
link |
See, you make it seem like to be at the level you're at,
link |
you can get away without having demons,
link |
without having fears,
link |
without being driven by some of the darker forces.
link |
I mean, you sound almost religious.
link |
The darker forces, spiritual demons.
link |
I mean, do you have a call for a priest?
link |
That's what I'm dressing as.
link |
Now, just let's go back to these crucial chess moments
link |
where I had to make big decisions.
link |
As I said, it was all about my belief from very early days
link |
that I can make all the difference by playing well
link |
or by making mistakes.
link |
So yes, I always had an opponent
link |
across the chess board, opposite me.
link |
But no matter how strong the opponent was,
link |
whether it just was ordinary player
link |
or another world champion like Anatoly Karpov,
link |
having all respect for my opponent,
link |
I still believe that it's up to me to make the difference.
link |
And I knew I was not invincible.
link |
I made some blunders.
link |
And with age, I made more blunders.
link |
But it's still, it's very much for me
link |
to be decisive factor in the game.
link |
I mean, even now, look, I just,
link |
my latest chess experience was horrible.
link |
I mean, I played Caruana, Fabi Caruana,
link |
this number two, number two,
link |
number three player in the world these days.
link |
We played this 960 with the Fischer,
link |
so called Fischer random chess, reshuffling pieces.
link |
Yeah, I lost very badly, but it's because I made mistakes.
link |
I mean, I had so many winning positions.
link |
I mean, 15 years ago, I would have crushed him.
link |
So, and it's, you know, while I lost,
link |
I was not so much upset.
link |
I mean, I know, as I said in the interview,
link |
I can fight any opponent, but not my biological clock.
link |
So it's fighting time is always a losing proposition.
link |
But even today at age 56, you know,
link |
I knew that, you know, I could play great game.
link |
I couldn't finish it because I didn't have enough energy
link |
or just, you know,
link |
I couldn't have the same level of concentration.
link |
But, you know, in number of games
link |
where I completely outplayed one of the top players
link |
in the world, I mean, gave me a certain amount of pleasure.
link |
That is, even today, I haven't lost my touch.
link |
Not the same, you know.
link |
Okay, the jaws are not as strong
link |
and the teeth are not as sharp,
link |
but I could get to him just, you know,
link |
almost, you know, on the ropes.
link |
And it's, you know, and it's,
link |
I think it's, my wife said it well.
link |
I mean, she said, look, Gary,
link |
it's somehow, it's not just fighting your biological clock.
link |
It's just, you know, maybe it's a signal
link |
because, you know, the goddess of chess,
link |
since you spoke great about demons.
link |
The goddess of chess, Keisha,
link |
maybe she didn't want you to win
link |
because, you know, if you could beat
link |
number two, number three player in the world,
link |
I mean, that's one of the top players
link |
who just recently played World Championship match.
link |
If you could beat him,
link |
that would be really bad for the game of chess.
link |
But just, what people will say,
link |
oh, look, the game of chess, you know,
link |
it's not making any progress.
link |
The game is just, you know,
link |
it's totally devalued because, look,
link |
the guy coming out of retirement,
link |
you know, just, you know, winning games,
link |
maybe that was good for chess, not good for you.
link |
But it's, look, I've been following your logic.
link |
We should always look for, you know, demons,
link |
you know, superior forces and other things
link |
that could, you know, if not dominate our lives,
link |
but somehow, you know, play a significant role
link |
Yeah, so the goddess of chess had to send a message.
link |
Yeah, that's okay.
link |
So Gary, you should do something else.
link |
Now for a question that you have heard before,
link |
but give me a chance.
link |
You've dominated the chess world for 20 years,
link |
even still got it.
link |
Is there a moment, you said,
link |
you always look to create something new.
link |
Is there games or moments
link |
where you're especially proud of
link |
in terms of your brilliance of a new creative move?
link |
You've talked about Mikhail Tal
link |
as somebody who was aggressive and creative chess player
link |
Look, you mentioned Mikhail Tal.
link |
It's very aggressive, very sharp player,
link |
famous for his combinations and sacrifices,
link |
even called magician from Riga,
link |
so for his very unique style.
link |
But any world champion, you know,
link |
it's, yeah, was a creator.
link |
Some of them were so flamboyant and flash like Tal.
link |
Some of them were no just, you know,
link |
less discerned at the chess board like Tigran Petrosian,
link |
but every world champion, every top player
link |
brought something into the game of chess.
link |
And each contribution was priceless
link |
because it's not just about sacrifices.
link |
Of course, amateurs, they enjoy, you know,
link |
the brilliant games where pieces being sacrificed.
link |
It's all just, you know, it's all piece of hanging.
link |
And it's all of a sudden, you know,
link |
being material down, a rook down,
link |
or just, you know, queen down.
link |
The weaker side delivers the final blow
link |
on just, you know, mating opponent's king.
link |
But there are other kinds of beauty.
link |
I mean, it's a slow positional maneuvering,
link |
you know, looking for weaknesses
link |
and just, and gradually, you know,
link |
strangling your opponent
link |
and eventually delivering sort of a positional masterpiece.
link |
So I think I made more difference in the game of chess
link |
than I could have imagined when I started playing.
link |
And the reason I thought it was time for me to leave
link |
was just, I mean, I knew that I was not,
link |
I was not, no longer the position to
link |
bring the same kind of contribution,
link |
the same kind of new knowledge into the game.
link |
So, and going back,
link |
I could immediately look at my games
link |
against Anatoly Karpov.
link |
It's not just I won the match in 1985
link |
and became a world champion at age 22,
link |
but there were at least two games in that match.
link |
Of course, the last one, game 24,
link |
that was decisive game of the match,
link |
I won and became world champion.
link |
But also the way I won, it was a very sharp game
link |
and I found a unique maneuver that was absolutely new
link |
and it became some sort of just a typical now,
link |
though just when the move was made,
link |
was made on the board and put on display,
link |
a lot of people thought it was ugly.
link |
And another game, game 16 in the match
link |
where I just also managed to outplay Karpov completely
link |
with black pieces, just paralyzing his entire army
link |
Technically or psychologically,
link |
or was that a mix of both in game 16?
link |
Yeah, I think it was a big blow to Karpov.
link |
I think it was a big psychological victory
link |
for a number of reasons.
link |
One, the score was equal at the time
link |
and the world champion by the rules
link |
could retain his title in case of a tie.
link |
So we still have, before game 16, we have nine games to go.
link |
And also it was some sort of a bluff
link |
because neither me nor Karpov saw the refutation
link |
of this opening idea.
link |
And I think it says for Karpov, it was double blow
link |
because not that he lost the game, I should triple blow.
link |
He lost the game, it was a brilliant game
link |
and I played impeccably after just this opening bluff.
link |
And then they discovered that it was a bluff.
link |
So it's the, again, I didn't know, I was not bluffing.
link |
So that's why it happens very often.
link |
Some ideas could be refuted.
link |
And it's just, what I found out,
link |
and this is again, going back to your spiritual theme
link |
is that you could spend a lot of time working.
link |
And when I say you could, it's in the 80s, in the 90s.
link |
It doesn't happen these days because everybody
link |
You could immediately see if it works or it doesn't work.
link |
Machine shows your refutation in a split of a second.
link |
But many of the analysis in the 80s or in the 90s,
link |
they were not perfect simply because we're humans
link |
and just you analyze the game,
link |
you look for some fresh ideas.
link |
And then just it happens that there was something
link |
that you missed because the level of the concentration
link |
at the chess board is different from when you analyze
link |
the game, just moving the pieces around.
link |
And, but somehow if you spend a lot of time
link |
at the chess board preparing, so in your studies
link |
with your coaches, hours and hours and hours,
link |
and nothing of what you found could,
link |
had materialized on the chess board.
link |
Somehow these hours help, I don't know why,
link |
always helped you.
link |
It's as if the amount of work you did could be transformed
link |
into some sort of spiritual energy that helped you
link |
to come up with other great ideas during the board.
link |
Again, even if there was no direct connection
link |
between your preparation and your victory in the game,
link |
there was always some sort of invisible connection
link |
between the amount of work you did,
link |
your dedication to actually, and your passion
link |
to discover new ideas, and your ability during the game
link |
at the chess board, when the clock was ticking,
link |
we still had ticking clock, not digital clock at the time.
link |
So to come up with some brilliance.
link |
And I also can mention many games from the 90s.
link |
So it's the, obviously all amateurs would pick up my game
link |
against Veselin Topalov in 1999 and V. Konzai.
link |
Again, because it was a brilliant game,
link |
the Black King traveled from its own camp
link |
to into White's camp across the entire board.
link |
It doesn't happen often, trust me, as you know,
link |
in the games with professional players,
link |
top professional players.
link |
So that's why visually it was one
link |
of the most impressive victories.
link |
But I could bring to your attention many other games
link |
that were not so impressive for amateurs,
link |
not so beautiful, just because it's sacrifice
link |
is always beautiful, you sacrifice pieces.
link |
And then eventually you have very few resources left
link |
and you use them just to crush your opponent basically.
link |
You have to make the king because you have almost
link |
nothing left at your disposal.
link |
But up to the very end, again, less and less,
link |
but still up to the very end, I always had games
link |
with some sort of interesting ideas
link |
and games that gave me great satisfaction.
link |
But I think it's what happened from 2005 up to these days
link |
was also a very big accomplishment
link |
since I had to find myself to sort of relocate myself.
link |
Yeah, rechannel the creative energies.
link |
Exactly, and to find something where I feel comfortable,
link |
even confident that my participation
link |
still makes the difference.
link |
So let me ask perhaps a silly question,
link |
but sticking on chest for just a little longer.
link |
Where do you put Magnus Carlsen, the current world champion
link |
in the list of all time greats?
link |
In terms of style, moments of brilliance, consistency.
link |
It's a tricky question.
link |
The moment you start ranking world champions.
link |
Yeah, you lose something?
link |
I think it's not fair because any new generation
link |
knows much more about the game than the previous one.
link |
So when people say, oh, Gary was the greatest,
link |
Fischer was the greatest, Magnus was the greatest,
link |
it disregard the fact that the great players of the past,
link |
whether it was Alaskia, Capoplank, Alokian,
link |
I mean, they knew so little about chess
link |
by today's standards.
link |
I mean, today, just any kid that spent a few years
link |
with his or her chess computer knows much more
link |
about the game simply just because you have access
link |
to this information.
link |
And it has been discovered generation after generation.
link |
We added more and more knowledge to the game of chess.
link |
It's about the gap between the world champion
link |
and the rest of the field.
link |
So it's the, now, if you look at the gap,
link |
then probably Fischer could be on top,
link |
but very short period of time.
link |
Then you should also add a time factor.
link |
I was on top, not as big as Fischer, but much longer.
link |
So, and also, unlike Fischer,
link |
I succeeded in beating next generation.
link |
Here's the question.
link |
Let's see if you still got the fire,
link |
speaking of the next generation,
link |
because you did succeed beating the next generation.
link |
Okay, Anand, Short, Anand, the sheer of,
link |
Kramnik is already 12 years younger.
link |
So that's the next.
link |
But still yet, I competed with them
link |
and I just, I beat most of them.
link |
And I was still dominant when I left at age of 41.
link |
So back to Magnus.
link |
Magnus, I mean, consistency is phenomenal.
link |
The reason Magnus is on top,
link |
and it seems unbeatable today,
link |
Magnus is a lethal combination of Fischer and Karpov,
link |
which is very, it's very unusual
link |
because Fischer's style was very dynamic,
link |
just fighting to the last point,
link |
just using every resource available.
link |
Karpov was very different.
link |
It's just an unparalleled ability
link |
to use every piece with a maximum effect.
link |
Just its minimal resources always produce maximum effect.
link |
So now imagine that you merge these two styles.
link |
So it's like, you know,
link |
it's squeezing every stone for a drop of water,
link |
but doing it, you know, just, you know,
link |
for 50, 60, 70, 80 moves.
link |
I mean, Magnus could go on as long as Fischer
link |
with all his passion and energy.
link |
And at the same time being as meticulous
link |
and deadly as Karpov by just, you know,
link |
using every little advantage.
link |
So, and he has good, you know, very good health.
link |
I mean, physical conditions are, by the way,
link |
So a lot of people don't recognize it.
link |
Their latest study shows that chess players
link |
burn thousands of calories during the game.
link |
So that puts him on the top of this field
link |
of the world champions.
link |
But again, it's the discussion that is,
link |
I saw recently on the internet,
link |
whether Garry Kasparov of his peak,
link |
let's say late eighties, could beat Magnus Carlsen today.
link |
I mean, it's certainly irrelevant
link |
because Garry Kasparov in 1989, okay,
link |
has played great chess,
link |
but still I knew very little about chess
link |
compared to Magnus Carlsen in 2019,
link |
who by the way, learned from me as well.
link |
So that's why, yeah.
link |
I'm extremely cautious in making any judgment
link |
that involves, you know, time gaps.
link |
You ask, you know, soccer fans.
link |
So who is your favorite?
link |
Pele, Maradona, or Messi?
link |
Yeah, who's your favorite?
link |
Maybe Maradona, maybe.
link |
Not because you're younger, but that's simple.
link |
Your instinctive answer is correct
link |
because you saw, you didn't see Maradona in action.
link |
I saw all of them in action.
link |
So that's why, but since, you know,
link |
when I was, you know, just following it, you know,
link |
just Pele and Maradona, they were just, you know,
link |
they were big stars and it's, Messi's already just,
link |
I was gradually losing interest in just other things.
link |
So I remember Pele in 1970, the final match Brazil Italy.
link |
So that's the first World Cup soccer I watched.
link |
So that's the, and actually my answer when I just,
link |
when I just, you know,
link |
because I was asked this question as well.
link |
So I say that it's just,
link |
while it's impossible to make a choice,
link |
I would still probably go with Maradona for simple reason.
link |
The Brazilian team in 1970 could have won without Pele.
link |
It was absolutely great.
link |
Still could have won, maybe, but it is,
link |
Argentinian team in 1986 without Maradona
link |
would not be in the final.
link |
So this is, and Messi, he still hasn't won a title.
link |
You could argue for that for an hour,
link |
but you could say, if you ask Maradona,
link |
if you look in his eyes, especially,
link |
let's say Gary Kasparov in 1989,
link |
he would have said,
link |
I was sure as hell would beat Magnus Carlsen.
link |
Just simply because. The confidence, the fire.
link |
Simply because, again, they saw me in action.
link |
So this, again, it's the age factor that's important.
link |
Definitely with the passion and energy
link |
and being equipped with all modern ideas.
link |
But again, then you make, you know,
link |
a very just important assumption
link |
that you could empower Gary Kasparov in 1989
link |
with all ideas that have been accumulated over 30 years.
link |
That would not be Gary Kasparov.
link |
That would be someone else.
link |
Because again, I belong to 1989.
link |
I was way ahead of the field.
link |
And I beat Karpov several times
link |
in the World Championship matches.
link |
And I crossed 2800, which, by the way,
link |
if you look at the, in the rating,
link |
which is just, even today,
link |
so this is the rating that I retire.
link |
So it's still, you know, it's just, it's a top two, three.
link |
So that's Caruana and Ding.
link |
It's about the same rating now.
link |
And I crossed 2800 in 1990.
link |
Well, just you look at the inflation.
link |
When I crossed 2800 in 1990,
link |
there was only one player in 2700 category,
link |
and not only Karpov.
link |
Now we had more than 50.
link |
So just, when you see this, so if you add inflation,
link |
so I think my 2851, it could probably,
link |
could be more valuable as Magnus 2882,
link |
which was his highest rating.
link |
But anyway, again, too many hypotheticals.
link |
You're lost to IBM Deep Blue in 1997.
link |
In my eyes, that is one of the most seminal moments
link |
Again, I apologize for being romanticizing the notion,
link |
but in the history of our civilization,
link |
because humans, as the civilizations,
link |
for centuries saw chess as, you know,
link |
the peak of what man can accomplish
link |
of intellectual mastery, right?
link |
And that moment when a machine could beat a human being
link |
was inspiring to just an entire,
link |
anyone who cares about science, innovation,
link |
an entire generation of AI researchers.
link |
And yet, to you that loss, at least if reading your face,
link |
was, seemed like a tragedy, extremely painful.
link |
Like you said, physically painful.
link |
When you look back at your psychology of that loss,
link |
why was it so painful?
link |
Were you not able to see the seminal nature of that moment?
link |
Or was that exactly why it was that painful?
link |
As I already said, losing was painful, physically painful.
link |
And the match I lost in 1997
link |
was not the first match I lost to a machine.
link |
It was the first match I lost, period.
link |
Yeah, that makes all the difference to me.
link |
First time I lost, it's just...
link |
Now, I lost, and the reason I was so angry
link |
that I just, you know, I had suspicions
link |
that my loss was not just a result of my bad play.
link |
So though I played quite poorly, you know,
link |
just when you started looking at the games today,
link |
I made tons of mistakes.
link |
But, you know, I had all reasons to believe that,
link |
you know, there were other factors
link |
that had nothing to do with the game of chess.
link |
And that's why I was angry.
link |
But look, it was 22 years ago.
link |
It's water under the bridge.
link |
We can analyze this match,
link |
and this is with everything you said.
link |
I agree with probably one exception,
link |
is that considering chess, you know,
link |
as the sort of, as a pinnacle of intellectual activities,
link |
Because, you know, we just thought,
link |
oh, it's a game of the highest intellect,
link |
and it's just, you know, you have to be so,
link |
you know, intelligent, and you could see things
link |
that, you know, the ordinary mortals could not see.
link |
It's a game, and all machines had to do with this game
link |
is just to make fewer mistakes, not to solve the game.
link |
Because the game cannot be solved.
link |
I mean, according to Kovalevich Shannon,
link |
the number of legal moves is 10 to the 46th power.
link |
Too many zeros, so just for any computer
link |
to finish the job, you know, in next few billion years.
link |
But it doesn't have to.
link |
It's all about making fewer mistakes.
link |
And I think that's the, this match,
link |
this match actually, and what's happened afterwards
link |
with other games, with Go, with Shoggy, with video games.
link |
It's a demonstration that machines will always be humans
link |
in what I call closed systems.
link |
The moment you build a closed system,
link |
no matter how the system's called, chess, Go, Shoggy,
link |
Dota, machines will prevail simply because they will
link |
bring down a number of mistakes.
link |
Machines don't have to solve it, they just have to,
link |
the way they outplay us, it's not by just being
link |
more intelligent, it's just by doing something else,
link |
but eventually it's just, it's capitalizing on our mistakes.
link |
When you look at the chess machines ratings today,
link |
and compare this to Magnus Carlsen,
link |
it's the same as comparing Ferrari to Usain Bolt.
link |
It's the, the gap is, I mean, by chess standards,
link |
is insane, 34, 3500 to 2800, 2850 on Magnus.
link |
It's like difference between Magnus and an ordinary player
link |
from an open international tournament.
link |
It's not because machine understanding
link |
is better than Magnus Carlsen,
link |
but simply because it's steady.
link |
Machine has steady hand.
link |
And I think that is what we, we, we,
link |
we have to learn from 1997 experience,
link |
and from further encounters with computers,
link |
and sort of the current state of affairs with AlphaZero,
link |
beating other machines.
link |
The idea that we can compete with computers
link |
in so called intellectual fields,
link |
it was wrong from the very beginning.
link |
It's just, it's, by the way, the 1997 match
link |
was not the first victory of machines over AlphaZero.
link |
No, actually it's, I played against
link |
first decent chess computers from late, from late 80s.
link |
So I played with the prototype of Deep Blue
link |
called Deep Thought in 1989,
link |
two rapid chess games in New York,
link |
I won handily to both games.
link |
We played against new chess engines like Fritz,
link |
and other programs.
link |
And then it's the, it was Israeli program Junior
link |
that appeared in 1995.
link |
Yeah, so there were, there were several programs.
link |
I, you know, I lost few games in Blitz.
link |
I lost one match against the computer chess engine
link |
So I lost one game to Deep Blue in 1996 match,
link |
the man, the match I won.
link |
Some people, you know, tend to forget about it
link |
that I won the first match.
link |
But it's, it's, we,
link |
we made a very important psychological mistake
link |
thinking that the reason we lost Blitz matches,
link |
five, five minutes games.
link |
The reason we lost some of the rapid chess matches,
link |
Because we didn't have enough time.
link |
If you play a longer match,
link |
we will not make the same mistakes.
link |
So this, yeah, we had more time,
link |
but we still make mistakes.
link |
And machine also has more time.
link |
And machines, machine will always, you know,
link |
will always be steady and consistent
link |
compared to humans instabilities and inconsistencies.
link |
And today we are at the point where yes,
link |
nobody talks about, you know,
link |
humans playing as machines.
link |
Now machines can offer handicap to top players
link |
and still, you know, will, will, will be favored.
link |
I think we're just learning that it's, it's,
link |
it's no longer human versus machines.
link |
It's about human working with machines.
link |
That's what I recognized in 1998,
link |
just after leaking my wounds and spending one year
link |
in just, you know, ruminating so the,
link |
so what's happened in this match.
link |
And I knew that though we still could play
link |
against the machines.
link |
I had two more matches in, in 2003,
link |
playing both Deep Fritz and Deep Junior.
link |
Both matches ended as a tie.
link |
Though these machines were not weaker,
link |
at least actually probably stronger than Deep Blue.
link |
And by the way, today chess app on your mobile phone
link |
is probably stronger than Deep Blue.
link |
I'm not speaking about chess engines
link |
that are so much superior.
link |
And by the way, when you analyze games
link |
we played against Deep Blue in 1997 on your chess engine,
link |
they'll be laughing.
link |
So this is, and it's also shows that's how chess changed
link |
because chess commentators, they look at some of our games
link |
like game four, game five, brilliant idea.
link |
Now you ask Stockfish, you ask Houdini,
link |
you ask Commodore, all the leading chess engines.
link |
Within 30 seconds, they will show you how many mistakes
link |
both Gary and Deep Blue made in the game
link |
that was trumpeted as the, as a great chess match in 1997.
link |
So you've made an interesting,
link |
if you can untangle that comment.
link |
So now in retrospect, it was a mistake to see chess
link |
as the peak of human intellect.
link |
Nevertheless, that was done for centuries.
link |
So by the way, in Europe, because you know,
link |
you move to the far East, they will go,
link |
they had show games.
link |
Again, some of the games like, you know, board games.
link |
So if I push back a little bit, so now you say that,
link |
okay, but it was a mistake to see chess as the epitome
link |
and now, and then now there's other things maybe
link |
like language, that conversation,
link |
like some of the things that in your view
link |
is still way out of reach of computers, but inside humans.
link |
Do you think, can you talk about what those things might be?
link |
And do you think just like chess, they might fall?
link |
Soon with the same set of approaches,
link |
if you look at AlphaZero,
link |
the same kind of learning approaches
link |
as the machines grow in size.
link |
No, no, it's not about growing in size.
link |
It's about, again, it's about understanding the difference
link |
between closed system and open ended system.
link |
So you think that key difference,
link |
so the board games are closed in terms of the rule set,
link |
the actions, the state space, everything is just constrained.
link |
You think once you open it, the machines are lost?
link |
Not lost, but again, the effectiveness is very different
link |
because machine does not understand the moment
link |
it's reaching territory of diminishing returns.
link |
It's the, to put it in a different way,
link |
machine doesn't know how to ask right questions.
link |
It can ask questions, but it will never tell you
link |
which questions are relevant.
link |
So there's the, it's like about the, it's the,
link |
So these, it's, I think it's in human machine relations,
link |
we have to consider, so our role and people,
link |
many people feel uncomfortable that this,
link |
the territory that belongs to us is shrinking.
link |
I'm saying, so what, you know, this is,
link |
eventually we'll belong to the last few decimal points,
link |
but it's like having, so a very powerful gun,
link |
that's, and all you can do there is slightly,
link |
you know, alter direction of the bullet.
link |
Maybe, you know, 0.1 degree of this angle,
link |
but that means a mile away, 10 meters of target.
link |
So that's, we have to recognize that is a certain
link |
unique human qualities that machines in a foreseeable future
link |
will not be able to reproduce.
link |
And the effectiveness of this cooperation,
link |
collaboration depends on our understanding
link |
what exactly we can bring into the game.
link |
So the greatest danger is when we try to interfere
link |
with machine superior knowledge.
link |
So that's why I always say that sometimes you'd rather have,
link |
by reading these pictures in radiology,
link |
you may probably prefer an experienced nurse
link |
than rather than having top professor,
link |
because she will not try to interfere
link |
with machines understanding.
link |
So it's very important to know that if machines knows
link |
how to do better things in 95%, 96% of territory,
link |
we should not touch it because it's happened.
link |
It's like in chess, recognize they do it better.
link |
See where we can make the difference.
link |
You mentioned AlphaZero, I mean, AlphaZero is,
link |
it's actually a first step into what you may call AI,
link |
because everything that's being called AI today,
link |
it's just, it's one or another variation
link |
of what Claude Shannon characterized as a brute force.
link |
It's a type A machine, whether it's Deep Blue,
link |
whether it's Watson, and all these modern technologies
link |
that are being trumpeted as AI, it's still brute force.
link |
It's the, all they do, it's they do optimization.
link |
It's this, they are, you know, they keep, you know,
link |
improving the way to process human generated data.
link |
Now, AlphaZero is the first step towards, you know,
link |
machine produced knowledge.
link |
Which is, by the way, it's quite ironic
link |
that the first company that championed that was IBM.
link |
Oh, it's in backgammon.
link |
Interesting, in backgammon.
link |
Yes, you should look at IBM, it's a newer gammon.
link |
It's the scientist called Cesaro.
link |
He's still working at IBM.
link |
They had it in the early 90s.
link |
It's the program that played, you know, the AlphaZero type,
link |
so just trying to come up with own strategies.
link |
But because of success of Deep Blue,
link |
this project had been not abandoned,
link |
but just, you know, it was put on hold.
link |
And now we just, you know, it's, you know,
link |
everybody talks about this,
link |
the machines generated knowledge, so as revolutionary.
link |
And it is, but there's still, you know,
link |
many open ended questions.
link |
Yes, AlphaZero generates its own data.
link |
Many ideas that AlphaZero generated in chess
link |
were quite intriguing.
link |
So I looked at these games with,
link |
not just with interest, but with, you know,
link |
it was quite exciting to learn how machine
link |
could actually, you know, juggle all the pieces
link |
and just play positions with a broken material balance,
link |
sacrificing material, always being ahead of other programs,
link |
you know, one or two moves ahead
link |
by foreseeing the consequences,
link |
not overcalculating because machines,
link |
other machines were at least as powerful in calculating,
link |
but it's having this unique knowledge
link |
based on discovered patterns after playing 60 million games.
link |
Almost something that feels like intuition.
link |
Exactly, but there's one problem.
link |
Now, the simple question,
link |
if AlphaZero faces superior point,
link |
let's say another powerful computer accompanied by a human
link |
who could help just to discover certain problems,
link |
because I already, I look at many AlphaZero games.
link |
I visited their lab, you know,
link |
spoke to Demis Hassabis and his team,
link |
and I know there's certain weaknesses there.
link |
Now, if these weaknesses are exposed,
link |
the question is how many games will it take
link |
for AlphaZero to correct it?
link |
The answer is hundreds of thousands.
link |
Even if it keeps losing, it can,
link |
it's just because the whole system is based.
link |
So it's now, imagine so this is,
link |
you can have a human by just making a few tweaks.
link |
So humans are still more flexible.
link |
And as long as we recognize what is our role,
link |
where we can play sort of,
link |
so the most valuable part in this collaboration.
link |
So it's, it will help us to understand
link |
what are the next steps in human machine collaboration.
link |
So let's talk about the thing that machines
link |
certainly don't know how to do yet, which is morality.
link |
Machines and morality.
link |
It's another question that, you know,
link |
just it's being asked all the time these days.
link |
And I think it's another phantom
link |
that is haunting a general public
link |
because it's just being fed with this,
link |
you know, illusions is that how can we avoid machines,
link |
you know, having bias, being prejudiced?
link |
You cannot, because it's like looking in the mirror
link |
and complaining about what you see.
link |
If you have certain bias in the society,
link |
machine will just follow it.
link |
It's just, it's, you know, you look at the mirror,
link |
you don't like what you see there.
link |
You can, you know, you can break it.
link |
You can try to distort it.
link |
Or you can try to actually change something.
link |
So it's very important to understand
link |
is that you cannot expect machines
link |
to improve the ills of our society.
link |
And moreover machines will simply, you know,
link |
just, you know, amplify it.
link |
But the thing is people are more comfortable
link |
with other people doing injustice, with being biased.
link |
We're not comfortable with machines
link |
having the same kind of bias.
link |
So that's an interesting standard
link |
that we place on machines.
link |
With autonomous vehicles, they have to be much safer.
link |
With automated systems.
link |
Of course they're much safer.
link |
Statistically, they're much safer than.
link |
It's not of course.
link |
Why would, it's not of course.
link |
Autonomous vehicles, you have to work really hard
link |
to make them safer.
link |
I think it just, it goes without saying
link |
is the outcome of this,
link |
I would call it competition with comparison is very clear.
link |
But the problem is not about being, you know, safer.
link |
It's the 40,000 people or so every year died
link |
in car accidents in the United States.
link |
And it's statistics.
link |
One accident with autonomous vehicle
link |
and it's front page of a newspaper.
link |
So it's, again, it's about psychology.
link |
So it's while people, you know,
link |
kill each other in car accidents
link |
because they make mistakes, they make more mistakes.
link |
For me, it's not a question.
link |
Of course we make more mistakes because we're human.
link |
Yes, machines are old.
link |
And by the way, no machine will ever reach 100% perfection.
link |
That's another important fake story
link |
that is being fed to the public.
link |
If machine doesn't reach 100% performance, it's not safe.
link |
No, all you can ask any computer,
link |
whether it's, you know, playing chess
link |
or doing the stock market calculations
link |
or driving your autonomous vehicle,
link |
it's to make fewer mistakes.
link |
And yes, I know it's not, you know,
link |
it's not easy for us to accept because ah,
link |
if, you know, if you have two humans, you know,
link |
colliding in their cars, okay, it's like,
link |
if one of these cars is autonomous vehicle,
link |
and by the way, even if it's humans fault, terrible.
link |
How could you allow a machine to run
link |
without a driver at the wheel?
link |
So, you know, let's linger that for a second,
link |
that double standard, the way you felt
link |
with your first loss against Deep Blue,
link |
were you treating the machine differently
link |
than you would have a human?
link |
Or, so what do you think about that difference
link |
between the way we see machines and humans?
link |
No, it's the, at that time, you know, for me it was a match.
link |
And that's why I was angry because I believed that
link |
the match was not, you know, fairly organized.
link |
So it's, definitely there were unfair advantages for IBM
link |
and I wanted to play another match, like a rubber match.
link |
So your anger or displeasure was aimed more like
link |
at the humans behind IBM versus the actual pure algorithm.
link |
Absolutely, look, I knew at the time,
link |
and by the way, I was, objectively speaking,
link |
I was stronger at that time.
link |
So that probably added to my anger
link |
because I knew I could beat the machine.
link |
Yeah. Yeah, so that's, and that's the,
link |
and as I lost, and I knew I was not well prepared.
link |
So because they, I have to give them credit.
link |
They did some good work from 1996 and I,
link |
but I still could beat the machine.
link |
So I made too many mistakes.
link |
Also, this is the whole, it's this,
link |
the publicity around the match.
link |
So I underestimated the effect, you know, just it's,
link |
and being called the, you know, the brain's last stand,
link |
you know, okay, no pressure.
link |
Okay, well, let me ask.
link |
So I was born also in the Soviet Union.
link |
What lessons do you draw from the rise and fall
link |
of the Soviet Union in the 20th century?
link |
When you just look at this nation
link |
that is now pushing forward into what Russia is,
link |
if you look at the long arc of history of the 20th century,
link |
what do we take away?
link |
What do we take away from that?
link |
I think the lesson of history is clear.
link |
Undemocratic systems, totalitarian regimes,
link |
systems that are based on controlling their citizens
link |
and just every aspect of their life,
link |
not offering opportunities to, for private initiative,
link |
central planning systems, they're doomed.
link |
They just, you know, they cannot be driving force
link |
for innovation, so they, in the history timeline,
link |
I mean, they could cause certain, you know,
link |
distortion of the concept of progress.
link |
They, by the way, they may call themselves progressive,
link |
but we know that the damage that they caused to humanity
link |
is just, it's yet to be measured.
link |
But at the end of the day, they fail.
link |
They fail, and the end of the Cold War was a great triumph
link |
of the free world.
link |
It's not that the free world is perfect.
link |
It's very important to recognize the fact that,
link |
I always like to mention, you know,
link |
one of my favorite books, The Lord of the Rings,
link |
that there's no absolute good, but there is an absolute evil.
link |
Good, you know, comes in many forms,
link |
but we all, you know, it's being humans
link |
or being even, you know, humans from fairy tales
link |
or just some sort of mythical creatures.
link |
It's the, you can always find spots on the songs.
link |
So this is conducting war and just,
link |
and fighting for justice.
link |
There are always things that, you know,
link |
can be easily criticized.
link |
And human history is the,
link |
is a never ending quest for perfection.
link |
But we know that there is absolute evil.
link |
We know it's, for me, it's no clear, it's, I mean,
link |
nobody argues about Hitler being absolute evil,
link |
but I think it's very important to recognize
link |
Stalin was absolute evil.
link |
Communism caused more damage
link |
than any other ideology in the 20th century.
link |
And unfortunately, while we all know
link |
that fascism was condemned,
link |
but there was no Nuremberg for communism.
link |
And that's why we could see, you know,
link |
still the successors of Stalin
link |
are feeling far more comfortable.
link |
And Putin is one of them.
link |
You highlight a few interesting connections actually
link |
between Stalin and Hitler.
link |
I mean, in terms of the adjusting
link |
or clarifying the history of World War II,
link |
which is very interesting.
link |
Of course, we don't have time.
link |
You can ask, you know,
link |
I just recently delivered a speech in Toronto
link |
at 80th anniversary of Molotov Ribbentrop Pact.
link |
It's something that I believe, you know,
link |
just, you know, has, must be taught in the schools
link |
that the World War II had been started by two dictators
link |
by signing these criminal treaty,
link |
collusion of two tyrants in August 1939
link |
that led to the beginning of the World War II.
link |
And the fact is that eventually Stalin had no choice
link |
but to join allies because Hitler attacked him.
link |
So it just doesn't, you know,
link |
eliminate the fact that Stalin helped Hitler
link |
to start World War II.
link |
And he was one of the beneficiaries at early stage
link |
by annexing a part of Eastern Europe.
link |
And as a result of the World War II,
link |
he annexed almost entire Eastern Europe.
link |
And for many Eastern European nations,
link |
the end of the World War II
link |
was the beginning of communist occupation.
link |
So Putin, you've talked about as a man who stands
link |
between Russia and democracy, essentially today.
link |
You've been a strong opponent and critic of Putin.
link |
Let me ask again, how much does fear
link |
enter your mind and heart?
link |
So in 2007, there's this interesting comment
link |
from Oleg Kalugin, KGB general.
link |
He said that I do not talk details.
link |
People who knew them are all dead now
link |
because they were vocal.
link |
There's only one man who's vocal and he may be in trouble.
link |
World Chess champion Kasparov.
link |
He has been very outspoken in his attacks on Putin.
link |
And I believe he's probably next on the list.
link |
So clearly your life has been
link |
and perhaps continues to be in danger.
link |
How do you think about having the views you have,
link |
the ideas you have, being in opposition as you are
link |
in this kind of context when your life could be in danger?
link |
That's the reason I live in New York.
link |
So it was not my first choice,
link |
but I knew I had to leave Russia at one point.
link |
And among other places, New York is the safest.
link |
It's the, I know what happened,
link |
what is happening with many of Putin's enemies.
link |
But at the end of the day, I mean, what can I do?
link |
I could be very proactive
link |
by trying to change things I can influence.
link |
But here are a few facts.
link |
I cannot stop doing what I've been doing for a long time.
link |
It's the right thing to do.
link |
I grew up with my family teaching me
link |
sort of the wisdom of Soviet dissidents,
link |
do what you must and so be.
link |
I could try to be cautious by not traveling
link |
to certain places where my security could be at risk.
link |
There are so many invitations to speak
link |
at different locations in the world.
link |
And I have to say that many countries are just now
link |
are not destinations that I can afford to travel.
link |
My mother still lives in Moscow.
link |
I meet her a few times a year.
link |
She was devastated when I had to leave Russia
link |
because since my father died in 1971,
link |
so she was 33 and she dedicated her entire life
link |
But she recognized in just a year or so
link |
since I left Russia that it was the only chance
link |
for me to continue my normal life.
link |
So just to, I mean, to be relatively safe
link |
and to do what she taught me to do to make the difference.
link |
Do you think you will ever return to Russia
link |
or let me ask a different way?
link |
Even sooner than many people think
link |
because I think Putin's regime
link |
is facing unsurmountable difficulties.
link |
And again, I read enough historical books
link |
to know that dictatorships, they end suddenly.
link |
It's just on Sunday, dictator feels comfortable.
link |
He believes he's popular on Monday morning, he's bust.
link |
The good news and bad news.
link |
I mean, the bad news is that I don't know
link |
when and how Putin rule ends.
link |
The good news, he also doesn't know.
link |
Let me ask a question that seems to preoccupy
link |
the American mind from the perspective of Russia.
link |
One, did Russia interfere in the 2016 U.S. election,
link |
government sanction and future?
link |
Two, will Russia interfere in the 2020 U.S. election?
link |
And what does that interference look like?
link |
We had such an intelligent conversation.
link |
And you are ruining everything
link |
by asking such a stupid question.
link |
It's insulting for my intellect.
link |
Of course they did interfere.
link |
Of course they did absolutely everything to elect Trump.
link |
I mean, they said it many times.
link |
It is just, you know, I met enough KGB colonels in my life
link |
to tell you that, you know,
link |
just the way Putin looks at Trump, this is the way.
link |
Look, and I don't have to hear what he says,
link |
what Trump says, it just is,
link |
I don't need to go through congressional investigations.
link |
The way Putin looks at Trump
link |
is the way the KGB officers looked at the assets.
link |
It's just, and following to 2020,
link |
of course they will do absolutely everything
link |
to help Trump to survive.
link |
Because I think the damage that Trump's reelections
link |
could cause to America and to the free world,
link |
it's just, it's beyond one's imagination.
link |
I think basically if Trump is reelected,
link |
he will ruin NATO, because he's already heading
link |
in this direction, but now he's just,
link |
he's still limited by the reelection hurdles.
link |
If he's still in the office after November, 2020,
link |
okay, January, 2021, I don't want to think about it.
link |
My problem is not just Trump,
link |
because Trump is basically, it's a symptom.
link |
But the problem is that I don't see,
link |
it's just, it's the, in American political horizon,
link |
politicians who could take on Trump
link |
for all damage that he's doing for the free world.
link |
Not just things that has happened
link |
that went wrong in America.
link |
So there's the, it seems to me that the campaign,
link |
political campaign on the Democratic side
link |
is fixed on certain important, but still secondary issues.
link |
Because when you have the foundation of the republic
link |
in jeopardy, I mean, you cannot talk about healthcare.
link |
I mean, I understand how important it is,
link |
but it's still secondary because the entire framework
link |
of American political life is at risk.
link |
And you have Vladimir Putin just,
link |
it's having, fortunately, free hands
link |
by attacking America and other free countries.
link |
And by the way, we have so much evidence
link |
about Russian interference in Brexit,
link |
in elections in almost every European country.
link |
And thinking that they will be shy of attacking America
link |
in 2020, now with Trump in the office, yeah.
link |
I think it's, yeah, it definitely diminishes
link |
the intellectual quality of our conversation.
link |
If you can go back, just look at the entirety of your life,
link |
you accomplished more than most humans will ever do.
link |
If you could go back and relive a single moment
link |
in your life, what would that moment be?
link |
There are moments in my life when I think
link |
about what could be done differently, but.
link |
No, experience happiness and joy and pride.
link |
Just a touch once again.
link |
I know, I know, but it's the, it's the,
link |
I made many mistakes in my life.
link |
So I just, it's the, I know that at the end of the day,
link |
it's, I believe in the butterfly effect.
link |
So it's the, it's the, I knew moments where I could,
link |
now if I'm there at that point in 89 and 93,
link |
you pick up a year, I could improve my actions
link |
by not doing this stupid thing.
link |
But then how do you know
link |
that I will have all other accomplishments?
link |
I just, I'm, I'm afraid that, you know,
link |
we just have to just follow this,
link |
if you may call wisdom before is gump, you know,
link |
it's the life is this, you know, it's, this is,
link |
it's a box of, of, of, of chocolate
link |
and you don't know what's inside,
link |
but you have to go one by one.
link |
So it's the, I'm, I'm happy with who I am
link |
and where I am today.
link |
And I am very proud, not only with my chess accomplishments,
link |
but that I made this transition.
link |
And since I left chess, you know,
link |
I built my own reputation that had some influence
link |
on the game of chess, but not, it's not, you know,
link |
directly derived from, from, from the game.
link |
I'm grateful for my wife.
link |
So help me to build this life.
link |
We actually married in 2005.
link |
It was my third marriage.
link |
That's why I said I'd made mistakes in my life.
link |
But, and by the way, I'm close with two kids
link |
from my previous marriages.
link |
So that's, that's the, I'm, you know,
link |
I managed to sort of to balance my life and,
link |
and here in, I live in New York.
link |
So we have our two kids born here in New York.
link |
It's, it's new life and it's, you know, it's, it's busy.
link |
Sometimes I wish I could, you know, I could limit
link |
my engagement in many other things that are still,
link |
you know, taking time and energy,
link |
but life is exciting.
link |
And as long as I can feel that I have energy,
link |
I have strengths, I have passion to make the difference,
link |
I think that's a beautiful moment to end on.
link |
Gary, thank you very much for talking today.