Personally, I rather look forward to a computer program winning the world chess championship. Humanity needs a lesson in humility.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Computers have proved to be formidable chess players. In fact, they've beaten our top human chess champions.
In chess, computers show that what we call 'strategy' is reducible to tactics, ultimately. It only looks creative to us. They are still just glorified cash registers. This should make us feel uncomfortable, whether or not we think computers will ever be good composers of music or artistic painters.
When humans team up with computers to play chess, the humans who do best are not necessarily the strongest players. They're the ones who are modest and who know when to listen to the computer. Often, what the human adds is knowledge of when the computer needs to look more deeply.
Chess is intellectual gymnastics.
We've seen computers play chess and beat grand masters. We've seen computers drive a car across a desert. But interestingly, playing chess is easy, but having a conversation about nothing is really difficult for a computer.
Chess is life.
I don't look at computers as opponents. For me it is much more interesting to beat humans.
Chess is mental torture.
I've always felt that the human-centered approach to computer science leads to more interesting, more exotic, more wild, and more heroic adventures than the machine-supremacy approach, where information is the highest goal.
Chess is changing. I hope chess is getting more popular, more spectacular.