He was still paid millions to continue performing his job. If after that match he was "fired" from chess I don't think he would take it in stride at all.

It actually sounded like he was still hurt by it, he was very derogatory about Deepblue, it had no intelligence, just cruching numbers etc. He was finding other faults with it except for the bit that beat him.

The quotes I've heard coming out about Alpha Go (from Go players) seem to be more repectful - that it's actually teaching professional go players new ways of playing.

Of course Go players probably saw it coming. Also, Google knew that he needed to leave good impression, not just beat the best human player.

Yes, but it took 20 years for Kasparov to find that grace. After losing game 2 of the 1997 match to Deep Blue, he accused the IBM team of cheating, by allowing a human grandmaster to override DB at a critical moment in the game. He repeated this bogus claim for many years, before finally coming to his senses.

He took it pretty badly at the time, though I'm glad to see he's come around.

> one of the first humans to have their job outperformed by a computer

Perhaps relevant here is that "computer" was a term used to describe people who did computations.

You might want to look up where the term "computer" comes from. Hint: It was a job description.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_computer

Right... except in this context we're clearly talking about digital computers. Intentionally confusing the two does not contribute to the discussion.

No, in this context we're talking about things digital computers can do better than humans. Doing arithmetic was the first job where digital computers replaced humans, so my comment is quite relevant to the discussion.

You could argue that the automatic loom of the 1700s was the first computer that could outperform humans, and the people it replaced were so ungracious that it began the Luddite movement.

Obviously he was not the first. Not even close.

I don't think he should concede it to machines like that.