Kasparov himself reminded me of the match in an article he published in the February 11 issue of the New York Review of Books . It's ostensibly a review of the book Chess Metaphors: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Mind , by Diego Rasskin-Gutman, but much more interesting for me were Kasparov's insights on the interplay between people and computers around the game of chess. He's a formidably intelligent person (duh) who has thought deeply about the implications of the computerization of his profession. He's also a fine writer, so the piece is a delight to read. And it contains lessons for playing the game of business better.

Here's what the article boils down to:

I didn't think that smart process design - in this case, a process for determining the "best" chess move - could overcome both cognitive and computational deficits. But it did, even in this domain where brains and calculations would appear to be the only things that matter. As Kasparov writes of this amazing result, "Weak human machine better process was superior to a strong computer alone and, more remarkably, superior to a strong human machine inferior process." I think that's my new motto.

Also mentioned in the article, and definitely worth learning about, is the Moravec's paradox .