IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#51

Post by ChuckMcM » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:28 PM UTC

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #23

ChuckMcM wrote: post #15

The author's particular gripe is that the Watson advertisements showing someone sitting down and talking to "Watson." They bother me as well (and did so when I was working at IBM in the Watson group) because they portray a capability that nothing in IBM can provide. Nobody can provide it (again to the author's point) because dialog systems (those which interact with a user through conversational speech) don't exist o…

Kinda how Tesla advertises autopilot as a self driving car that's safer than human drivers? > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. https://www.tesla.com/autopilot/

That is a much better example. With the twist that believing it can get you killed.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#52

Post by Rjevski » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:28 PM UTC

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #23

ChuckMcM wrote: post #15

The author's particular gripe is that the Watson advertisements showing someone sitting down and talking to "Watson." They bother me as well (and did so when I was working at IBM in the Watson group) because they portray a capability that nothing in IBM can provide. Nobody can provide it (again to the author's point) because dialog systems (those which interact with a user through conversational speech) don't exist o…

Kinda how Tesla advertises autopilot as a self driving car that's safer than human drivers? > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. https://www.tesla.com/autopilot/

Hardware. That’s the keyword, and it might very well be true. Tesla doesn’t claim their software is capable of full self-driving yet and in fact the system will scream at you and stop the car if you take your hands off the steering wheel for too long.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#53

Post by ironchief » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:28 PM UTC

clavalle wrote: post #19

I briefly worked with a Watson team on a cool idea to map a person's 'knowledge space' (or probable knowledge space given their background) against Watson's knowledge space and guide them to relevant learning materials and journal articles and the like. The idea was to save people time so they aren't rehashing stuff they know down pat or jumping ahead into material they cannot understand but, instead, find that next…

I'm interested in the original idea. Can you expand on how your ideal system would function?

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#54

Post by nkassis » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:29 PM UTC

cryptoz wrote: post #18

baxtr wrote: post #9

AI is definitely starting to enter the “through of disillusionment” in its hype cycle.

Is it really? I don't see that at all. Rather I see AI as finally being entrenched in normal, everyday products and services. AI is here to stay and the hype hasn't even started yet, at least not compared to what's coming. Billions of people own devices that they can talk to, that can talk back, that can translate between more languages than humans can, that know facts about you that you didn't even know yourself, et…

While there are domains where AI is having successes, the current general expectation is far ahead of where the technology is. People think (and in part due to the marketing like IBM is putting out) that ML/AI can do things that aren't possible yet.

There may be a reset in expectation soon which will lead to become more pessimistic at claims being made and the marketing. Once we are through that, it will be easier to get people to understand what use cases align with the available technology and implementing ML/AI will become more productive. Aka the Trough of Disillusionment followed by the plateau of productivity.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#55

Post by deisner » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:29 PM UTC

"Recently they ran an ad featuring Bob Dylan which made laugh, or would have, if had made not me so angry." Wait, is Roger Schank an AI trying to convince humans that AIs are impotent and harmless? Pretty sneaky, Schank-bot.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#56

Post by dwighttk » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:30 PM UTC

fixermark wrote: post #35

dwighttk wrote: post #26

(2016)

"©2018 Roger Schank" at the bottom? Unless that's just an auto-generated copyright output that updates to the current year.

that's just auto generated... I saved the bookmark in 2016... could be even earlier. I don't see any dates. Wayback machine has its first saved copy in May 2016 which matches my bookmark.

http://web.archive.org/web/20160523070729/http://www.rogersc...

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#57

Post by megaman22 » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:31 PM UTC

Everything IBM says about Watson should be taken with a few tons of salt.

I don't know how much I'm allowed to say, but they couldn't even get it to work acceptably internally for some of the basic datamining and natural language processing that are among the things so highly touted in some of their TV advertising. This is with a gargantuan dataset compiled from years of relevant interactions to train on in the particular area of interest.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#58

Post by ghostly_s » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:31 PM UTC

Rjevski wrote: post #52

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda how Tesla advertises autopilot as a self driving car that's safer than human drivers? > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. https://www.tesla.com/autopilot/

Hardware. That’s the keyword, and it might very well be true. Tesla doesn’t claim their software is capable of full self-driving yet and in fact the system will scream at you and stop the car if you take your hands off the steering wheel for too long.

It's deliberately deceptive, and I'm real tired of tech people tripping over each other to defend it. Technically correct? Sure. But deliberately phrased to obscure the fact that this is a hypothetical future capability that the product does not possess today. And please spare me your "well actually, the showroom attendants will clarify exactly what it means" -- they are framing this in a misleading way to generate public interest.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#59

Post by saosebastiao » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:31 PM UTC

nartz wrote: post #7

The way IBM talks about it is completely bs. However, this round of AI is definitely better than the last one. Specifically, whats different this time around is that previously, expert based systems and many machine learning techniques require that you specifically hand code things like: 1. Parsing and providing the input dataset into 'features' 2. Hand coding the logic and rules for many different cases (Expert syst…

> Now, it has become easier to train a model such as a neural net where you can provide much 'rawer' data; similarly you just provide it a 'goal' in the form of a loss function which it tries to optimize over the dataset.

"just".

Where is the mention of all of decisions on network size, node topologies, regularization, optimization methods, etc.. And you still have to do your first step.

Deep learning is way more complex than just choosing a loss function.

Re: IBM is not doing "cognitive computing" with Watson (2016)

#60

Post by GW150914 » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:32 PM UTC

Judgmentality wrote: post #44

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda how Tesla advertises autopilot as a self driving car that's safer than human drivers? > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. https://www.tesla.com/autopilot/

Am I extreme in feeling someone should go to jail for that? It was bad enough when they were originally advertising it, but now that they're defending it even after people died...ugh. https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/28/17172178/tesla-model-x-cr...

I think if anything you’re overly conservative for thinking somone rather than many people need jail time for it. I would look up the line of people who made and supported the decision for that kind of fraudulent marketing and drag them all into court.