Deep Blue or theComputer's Melancholia T h e clash b e t w e e n a h u m a n b e i n g a n d a n ' i n t e l l i g e n t ' artefact (Kasparov against D e e p Blue) is highly symbolic, n o t only on a c c o u n t of the prestige of the g a m e of chess, b u t b e c a u s e i t s u m s u p t h e d i l e m m a o f h u m a n b e i n g s w h e r e all o u r c o n t e m p o r a r y m a c h i n e s are c o n c e r n e d : c o m p u t e r s , v i r t u a l o r c y b e r n e t i c d e v i c e s , n e t w o r k s , etc. B e h i n d t h e i n s t r u m e n t a l , creative o r interactive use w e m a k e o f s u c h m a c h i n e s , t h e r e is, at b o t t o m , always a clash, a c h a l l e n g e , a m a t c h , a d u e l , in w h i c h o n e o f t h e parties m a y b e c h e c k m a t e d o r lose face. T h e r e i s n o i n t e r a c t i v i t y w i t h m a c h i n e s (any m o r e , i n fact, t h a n t h e r e i s w i t h h u m a n b e i n g s : t h a t i s t h e illusion o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n ) . T h e interface d o e s n o t exist. T h e r e i s always, b e h i n d t h e a p p a r e n t i n n o c e n c e o f t h e t e c h n o l o g y , a n issue o f rivalry a n d c o n t r o l . T h e g a m e o f chess m e r e l y carries this s i t u a t i o n t o e x t r e m e s . So, i n t h e e n d , Kasparov b e a t t h e c o m p u t e r , a n d e v e r y o n e was greatly relieved, since in a w a y t h e h o n o u r of t h e species was at stake. E v e n if h u m a n intelligence will o n e day have to a d m i t defeat, that m o m e n t m u s t be p o s t p o n e d for as l o n g as possible. A n d this is w h a t makes this v i c t o r y s o m e w h a t a m b i g u o u s , for e v e n if it was n o t rigged (and it certainly wasn't), Kasparov c o u l d n o t - at all costs - n o t w i n . M a n dreams w i t h 160 O r . of c o u r s e . I n t e r m s o f play. a n d w e offer t h e m a c h a n c e t o b e a t us. rather. H e can n o m o r e d o this t h a n G o d c o u l d . w h i l e at t h e same t i m e h e c a n n o t c o n c e i v e o f n o t r e m a i n i n g master o f his creations. t h e l a n g u a g e o f play . defeated b y his o w n creature.t h e l a n g u a g e o f c o m p u t e r s . T h i s i s w h a t w e can best h o p e for. each in t h e i m a g e of t h e i r respective languages.S C R E E N E D O U T all his m i g h t of i n v e n t i n g a m a c h i n e w h i c h is s u p e r i o r to himself. Kasparov was m o r e or less p i t t i n g h i m s e l f against a technical divinity. a technical s u p e r e g o divine in essence)? Yet that i s w h a t w e d o w i t h o u r c y b e r n e t i c creations. in a way. o n t h e o n l y occasion o n w h i c h h u m a n b e i n g s really s t o o d u p t o h i m . i n t h e T o w e r o f Babel episode. t h a n k s to that diversity that h u m a n beings g o t t h e b e t t e r o f G o d b y i n v e n t i n g m u l t i p l e w o r l d s a n d divinities. i t was surely b e c a u s e h e i s ( m e t a p h o r ically) c a p a b l e o f s p e a k i n g m o r e t h a n o n e l a n g u a g e : t h a t o f t h e e m o t i o n s . i f h e w o n . K a s p a r o v will b e b e a t e n . 161 .n o t t o m e n t i o n t h e l a n g u a g e o f c a l c u l a t i o n . s h o u l d w e n o t spread t h e s a m e confusion a m o n g artificial languages a s G o d d i d a m o n g natural ones? B u t w e k n o w that t h e diversity o f l a n g u a g e e v e n t u ally b e c a m e man's privilege a n d his absolute w e a p o n . as a m a r k of o u r p o w e r . M o r e o v e r . w o u l d have c o m m i t t e d suicide. It is. If computers were in danger of gaining t h e u p p e r h a n d . i n w h a t e v e r f o r m . i n t h e form of language and mutual understanding. W h e r e a s D e e p B l u e speaks o n l y t h e l a n g u a g e o f c a l c u l a t i o n . b u t o n e he n o n e t h e l e s s has t o b e a t t o save face. o f i n t u i t i o n . T h e day this latter l a n g u a g e prevails. G o d himself. So. C o u l d G o d have envisaged creating m a n s u p e r i o r t o himself a n d confronting h i m in a decisive c o m b a t (with D e e p Blue. i n a w o r d . o f t h e s t r a t a g e m . it is o u r d r e a m that t h e y s h o u l d surpass us .h e will b e b e a t e n . m a n i s n e i t h e r i n f e r i o r n o r s u p e r i o r t o G o d : h e has m a n a g e d t o k e e p u p a k i n d o f rivalry a n d o p e n g a m e . t h o u g h we c a n n o t b e a r this either. B u t . t o c o m e b a c k t o Kasparov. T h e day m a n h i m s e l f speaks o n l y t h a t single l a n g u a g e . m a n is t r a p p e d in t h e Utopian aspiration of h a v i n g a d o u b l e s u p e r i o r to himself.a n d do this. h e i m m e d i a t e l y cut t h e i r supply lines. t h e w h o l e t h i n g was played o u t i n a c l o s e d c i r c u i t o n t h e basis of c a l c u l a t i o n . M y h a n d s m o v e faster t h a n m y t h i n k i n g . strategy. n o o p p o n e n t . I t i s h e r e t h a t t h e h u m a n b e i n g c a n i m p o s e h i m s e l f t h r o u g h illusion. i s t h e s u b t l e a s s u m p t i o n o f g a m e . T h e possible v i c t o r y o f t h e c o m p u t e r p o s e s n o p r o b l e m : w e k n o w i t c a n b e d u e o n l y t o c a l c u l a t i n g p o w e r . ' Clearly.S C R E E N E D O U T B a l t h a z a r G r a c i a n said t h a t G o d ' s strategy i s t o k e e p m a n e t e r n a l l y i n suspense. Y o u c a n call it ' p s y c h o l o g y ' .n o o t h e r . n o e n e m i e s ( n o t even any A m e r i c a n s . t h a t t h e c o m p u t e r u n d e r s t a n d s least w e l l . T h e i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n is: w h a t m a k e s K a s p a r o v w i n ? T h e f i r s t a n s w e r i s g i v e n b y K a s p a r o v h i m s e l f w h e n h e says. it is a feature of h u m a n b e i n g s t h a t t h e y m o v e faster t h a n t h e i r t h i n k i n g . t h e r e w e r e n o o t h e r s . T h e s a m e applies h e r e . F o r D e e p B l u e . It c a n o n l y t h i n k fast. B u t i t isn't s o m u c h a q u e s t i o n o f any ' p s y c h i c a l ' faculties w h i c h m a n m i g h t possess i n a d d i t i o n t o his m e n t a l faculties o f c a l c u l a t i o n . c h a l l e n g e . T h i s r e l i n q u i s h m e n t . N o w . that t h e h u m a n b e i n g can e x p e c t t o b e definitively s u p e r i o r — i n t h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p o f o t h e r ness w h i c h i s b a s e d o n r e l i n q u i s h m e n t o f his o w n t h o u g h t . I t m o v e s w i t h i n t h e confines o f its o w n p r o g r a m m e . s e d u c t i o n a n d sacrifice. i n a way. t h e r e is n o t h i n g o u t t h e r e . s i n c e i t i s 162 . o f p l a y i n g w i t h i n o n e ' s c a p a b i l i t i e s . I t i s t h e s a m e i n t h e c o n f r o n t a t i o n b e t w e e n n a t u r a l a n d artificial i n t e l l i g e n c e : t h e rivalry i s u l t i m a t e l y irresolvable. ' I play w i t h o u t t h i n k i n g . Y o u can call it affect. n o Iraqis. i n t h e e n d ) . decoy. B u t t h e p r o p o s i t i o n i s reversible a n d w e t o o k e e p H i m i n suspense. relatively s p e a k i n g . t h e i r sex. a n d w h i c h . for Kasparov. a n d t h e best t h i n g i s for t h e m a t c h t o b e e t e r n a l l y p o s t p o n e d . d o e s n o t e v e n pass t h r o u g h t h e b l a c k b o x of t h e b r a i n . i n t u i t i o n . w h i c h D e e p B l u e will n e v e r k n o w . b e y o n d t h e m e n t a l p o w e r of calculation. t h a n k s t o s o m e t h i n g relating t o t h e i r b o d i e s . it is precisely at this p o i n t . N o w . I t i s this strategy o f n o t g o i n g t h e full h o g .p l a y i n g . a n o t h e r party. T h e basic difference is that. t h e r e is an o p p o n e n t . a s w i t h ' D e s e r t S t o r m ' : for t h e G u l f W a r c o m p u t e r s . D e e p B l u e has n o h a n d s t o m o v e faster t h a n its t h i n k i n g . D e e p B l u e . T h e h u m a n b e i n g takes this distraction o f t h o u g h t .p r o g r a m m e t h e m s e l v e s . He l e a r n s to play w e a k m o v e s . b e c o m e ' t e c h n i c a l l y i n c o r r e c t ' t o stay a h e a d o f t h e g a m e . this ' d e a d t i m e ' . o r t h e g a m e m a y die. K a s p a r o v insists o n t h e fact t h a t after his f i r s t defeat (but d o u b t l e s s y o u have always t o k n o w t o lose t h e f i r s t g a m e ) . T h e y m a y e v e n have t o take o v e r t h e m a c h i n e ' s o w n place. to simplify o r close u p t h e g a m e . t h e rules 163 . T h e player i s m o r t a l .p l a y e r ' s t h i n k i n g . y o u are unfailingly b e a t e n b y t h e m a c h i n e . it is this w h i c h t u r n s r o u n d against it. i s m e r e l y t h e s i m u l a t i o n o f c a l c u l a t i o n . T h a t i s t o say. y o u h a v e t o play against nature. T h e player m u s t n o t b e u n b e a t a b l e . L i k e t h e illusionist w h o h a d i n v e n t e d a n a u t o m a t o n w h i c h i m i t a t e d h u m a n b e i n g s o well that. w h i l e t h e o t h e r party.even in the f o r m of t h e v i r t u a l e g o of t h e c o m p u t e r . h e played against his o w n n a t u r e . t o e n t r a p his a d v e r s a r y (this is j u s t like Tire Diary of a Seducer).e S C R E E N E D O U T c o n d e m n e d t o play a t t h e h e i g h t o f its capabilities. w h e r e a s for h u m a n b e i n g s i t is an i r o n i c p o w e r . h u m a n b e i n g s c a n o n l y s u b t l y d e . to simulate better than it does and catch it out. d u r i n g w h i c h h e i s m e n t a l l y a b s e n t . paradoxically. T h e r e i s a n o t h e r factor f a v o u r i n g h u m a n s u p r e m a c y h e r e : this i s t h e basic s y m b o l i c r u l e w h i c h states that n o player c a n b e b i g g e r t h a n t h e g a m e itself. w h e r e a s t h e c o m p u t e r d o e s n o t d i v e r t a single s e c o n d f r o m its o w n c a l c u l a t i n g t i m e . catch it o u t by simulation w h i c h . for it. o n stage. Clearly. i s s u n k i n c a l c u l a t i o n .is real g a m e . f r o m his available t i m e . h e was h i m s e l f forced t o b e c o m e m e c h a n i c a l a n d m i m i c t h e a u t o m a t o n t o m a i n t a i n t h e d i s t i n c t i o n . B u t . w i t h a s i m u l a c r u m . W h e n u p against t h e m a c h i n e t h e y h a v e t h e m s e l v e s p r o g r a m m e d (let u s n o t forget t h a t i t was m e n like Kasparov w h o p r o g r a m m e d D e e p B l u e ) . T h i s s y n c o p a t i o n o r ellipsis o f presence by w h i c h you provoke the e m e r g e n c e of the other . ' w i t h i n h i m s e l f . K a s p a r o v h i m s e l f has s p o k e n (to ask that i t b e t a k e n a c c o u n t o f i n t h e t i m e o n t h e clocks) o f this ' d e a d t i m e o f t h e real d u r i n g w h i c h h e really t h i n k s ' . T h i s i s t h e o n l y possible strategy: i f y o u b e c o m e t e c h n i c a l l y c o r r e c t . t h e o n l y r e m a i n - 164 . t h e m a c h i n e w o u l d have h a d t o have i n v e n t e d it. I n a d e s p e r a t e effort t o l o o k like h i m . S o t h e r e i s little sense i n p r e d i c t i n g t h e c e r t a i n v i c t o r y o f t h e m a c h i n e i n 2 0 0 5 . o r c o m p e t e w i t h h i m . w h o f i l ters t h e data. a probabilistic disorder. F o r i f t h e c o m p u t e r ' s k n o w l e d g e i s e x p o n e n t i a l . w h i c h is u n i m a g i n a b l e . w i t h o u t regard for t h e initial state. b u t . W h i c h s h o w s i t has u n d e r s t o o d n o t h i n g o f t h e v e r y essence o f g a m e . it goes b a c k t o zero a n d goes t h r o u g h all t h e o p e r a t i o n s again. a n d for that r e a s o n i t will always b e b e a t e n i n t h e e n d . a n d w h i c h i s p e r h a p s closer t o t h e infinity o f c h a n c e (it w o u l d i n fact b e i n t e r e s t i n g t o c o n f r o n t t h e c o m p u t e r w i t h a g a m e o f c h a n c e or. N o w t h e a b s o l u t e a i m o f t h e m a c h i n e (its secret a m b i t i o n p e r haps?) i s t o b e perfect. w h e r e t h e essence of play is c o n c e r n e d . m a n p e r sonifies. W h e r e a s m a n . a t least b y t h e g a m e itself. a s i t w e r e . b e u n b e a t a b l e a t all k i n d s o f o p e r a t i o n s . Against t h e c o m p u t e r . w h e r e a s t h e m a c h i n e has e x p o n e n t i a l k n o w l e d g e . T o have access t o t h a t essence. u n p r e d i c t a b l e c o n s t e l l a t i o n s . its t h i n k i n g is n o t — w h i c h c o n d e m n s it to a k i n d of e x p o n e n t i a l stability: at e a c h m o v e . t h e i n f i n i t y o f c o m p l e x i t y . t h o u g h t w h i c h i s creative o f u n p r e c e d e n t e d . it is forever d i s a d v a n t a g e d — forever o u t of t h e g a m e .a n d i t i s t o o late for t h a t t o o . a n d actively c o n s i d e r s o n l y a few of w h a t is actually an i m m e n s e n u m b e r of possibilities. t h e n . o n t h e g r o u n d s that m a n has o n l y c u m u l a t i v e k n o w l e d g e . i f n o t b y t h e o p p o n e n t . is capable of e x t r a p o l a t i n g the data in a single d i r e c t i o n .p l a y i n g . w h i c h is different f r o m h u m a n disorder. i n o t h e r w o r d s . M o r e g e n e r a l l y to be a m a t c h for m a n . W h e r e w o u l d it find a w i n n i n g formula?) T h e m a c h i n e may.a k i n d of c h a o t i c strategy w h i c h e v e n a c o m p u t e r a t h o u s a n d t i m e s m o r e p o w e r f u l t h a n D e e p B l u e c o u l d n o t m a t c h u p to. t h e m a c h i n e w o u l d h a v e h a d t o h a v e i n v e n t e d h i m . A n d it is t o o late for this. u n b e a t a b l e a n d i m m o r t a l .S C R E E N E D O U T a l o n e are i m m o r t a l . w h i c h i s n o t t h e i n f i n i t y o f c a l c u l a t i o n . H e t h u s has t r u l y e x p o n e n t i a l t h o u g h t a t his c o m m a n d . w o u l d h a v e h a d t o h a v e b e e n able t o i n v e n t t h e very arbitrariness o f t h e rules. S C R E E N E D O U T i n g possibility is a c c i d e n t : an a c c i d e n t of c a l c u l a t i o n . o r t h i n k for h i m . N o r e v e n w h i c h c a n play b e t t e r t h a n h e c a n .a n d m a k i n g a strategy o u t of that. 1 April 165 1996 . H e has n e v e r i n v e n t e d a n y w h i c h c o u l d take pleasure o r suffer i n his stead. m o v e a n d t h i n k b e t t e r t h a n h i m . O r suicide. W h i c h p e r h a p s e x p l a i n s w h y c o m p u t e r s get s u c h d e e p b l u e s . M a n has i n v e n t e d m a c h i n e s w h i c h w o r k .
Report "Jean Baudrillard - Deep Blue or the Computer's Melancholia"