And the And now the good fight with Yasha Monk.

Hi, my name is Sam Khan. I'm an associate editor of Persuasion and I wanted to talk about my recent piece

Our Deep Blue Ops Lessons on AI Creativity in chess. This was a fun piece to write and emerged out of a

friendly debate I was having with Francisco Toro. His piece, our deep blue moment,

was an optimistic take on AI through the prism of chess. It was a smart piece, I respected it, and I fundamentally

disagreed with it. I'm an avid chess player, I've been playing for a long time, and for me the

best part about it wasn't even necessarily the games themselves, it was the Kibbtsing sessions that followed them.

This is a very familiar scene in any city park and any chess club anywhere in the world.

The game finishes and then everybody starts arguing about it.

And recently I've noticed that doesn't really exist anymore. Somebody reaches into their pocket, pulls out a phone, and a super computer or AI program tells them what should have happened in the game.

And I felt that something incalculable was lost in that and actually was a good way to talk about

larger issues in art.

There's a tendency to view activities like chess as being about getting at some sort of objective

logical truth or being better than an opponent, but that's not really the heart of the

activity.

It's hard as that it's fun, it's social, and actually it's an opportunity to express something

about yourself.

That's all the more the case in art, which is about saying something about one's human condition.

There's a rhetorical framework around AI claiming that it's part of progress

that it's going to make us better at all sorts of things

but my argument in the piece is that there's something we lost with it

something core about ourselves that we're unlikely to ever get back. So that's the piece, a

...