Interesting article and I agree with your conclusion.  It is important 
to note that this same computer that Kasporv defeated would probably 
defeat approximately 95% of the chess players in the world today.  Only 
about 5% of the chess players could beat the thing with any consistency.  
I am not giving an opinion--this is a fact.  The computer's rating is 
computed just as a human player's rating is computed--by games played 
and win/loss records.  This computer, Deep Blue, is rated among the top 
5 percent of human players in the world.  Pretty tough opponent for most 
people.
All this really means is that computers can be programmed to play good, 
solid chess.  It does not mean that computers are smarter than humans, 
or even that a computer can replace a teacher.  I am not a brilliant 
person but I do have a definite edge over my computer (of which I play 
chess and often win), I know where the off-switch is located .
dt
SK>Here is a quote from the May 19, 1996 Edupage:
SK> 
SK>-> DEEP BLUE DEBRIEFING
SK>-> IBM's Deep Blue computer was programmed to evaluate a total of
SK>-> about 20 billion moves within the three-minute window allotted for
SK>-> each move in a formal chess match.  That capability is enough to
SK>-> consider every possible move and countermove 12 sequences ahead
SK>-> and selected lines of attack as much as 30 moves beyond that.  The
SK>-> fact that this omniscience was not enough to beat a mere human is
SK>-> "amazing," says one of Deep Blue's programmers.  The lesson here,
SK>-> says another, is that chess masters such as Kasparov "are doing
SK>-> some mysterious computation we can't figure out."  Still, the IBM
SK>-> team got what it needed out of the match -- their goal has always
SK>-> been research to show how parallel processing can be used for
SK>-> solving complex problems such as airline scheduling or drug
SK>-> design, not to be world chess champions. After all, this *is* IBM,
SK>-> says an IBM PR person. (Scientific American May 96 p16)
SK> 
SK>Besides the comments about the abilities of the human mind, I think
SK>this also underscores the position that computers will not be able to
SK>replace human teachers in the classroom.
SK> 
SK>Sheila
SK> 
SK>--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 10
* CMPQwk #1.42* UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
--- GEcho 1.11+
---------------