Live data from Hacker News

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

rogerschank.com

71–80 of 452 posts

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

#71
post #16

It’s an unusually beautiful written article, well worth the read just for the prose. As for the main sentiment that we have a new AI winter, I’m not so sure. My lay person view is that we see quite a lot of commercial success with these systems so the current wave will be well funded for at least a decade.

What are the big successes? Speech recognition? Which still seems rather bad to me. Language translation (which for the languages I’m interested in (Japanese) is still almost totally unusable? Self driving cars? Which are not yet in production (and where the social issues are probably far harder than the technical ones, and likely have been since the 90s). Is there some big application if ML that I’m missing that is…

> Self driving cars?

For safety reasons, self-driving cars on the road don't rely on ML as much as you may think. It's much better to run algorithms with provable guarantees rather than black-box neural nets on a multi-ton vehicle. When the judge asks your company if you did everything in your power to prevent the death at hand, it helps to point to decades-old well proven techniques, rather than band new unproven, untested, trends.

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

#72
I worked on data systems that fed weather data into Watson.

IBM's technology, and IBM's marketing are very different beasts. The marketing is somewhat trivial, but the reality of ML and the Watson data systems is incredible. They are pumping a huge amount of data into it and they have data scientists doing incredible things with the data already. It is the largest growing segment of the company (and maybe the only growing segment of the company.)

The marketing of AI, and the realities of ML are always going to be disconnected. Sure, you will likely just get an email that says routine maintenance has been ordered on your elevator, not a box in the corner that tells you in a sexy, clear, non-robotic voice. As for Bob Dylan's songs... Christ. AI winter isn't coming unless the term AI gets squashed and people start calling it ML. This article is pretty FUD.

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

#73

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...

So...one person died?

Do you know how many people die in normal, non-self-driving cars? It's never possible to get 100% accuracy.

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

#74
post #9

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

oh man you can say that again. Look ma i can perform linear regression on a bunch of data , i'm a data scientist!!! Even better i just heard a new term 'IA', local tech meetup has a presenter with headline

"discussing an Intelligence Augmentation (IA) approach to human-assisted artificial intelligence."

oh god now we have IA and AI. holy shit!

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

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon's system for finding related products is eerily accurate. The more you buy, the better it gets at anticipating what you want to buy. ... but the larger wins they've had are behind the scenes, in the predictive modeling that helps them get product into warehouses in front of demand spikes (and into geographically-relevant warehouses to satisfy the spikes).

> Amazon's system for finding related products is eerily accurate. Amazon's system for finding related products fucking sucks. After I buy an X, I see ads for more X for months, which is completely useless. Sometimes I'll see ads for the exact thing I bought... what?!

That is amazing too me. When I did inside sales for a VAR in college in the 90s, we wrote a little app that would note the customer's account notes a few months after a printer installation to ask about toner.

It had a high conversion rate and better still got us referrals to the head executive assistant (who was usually the boss's assistant).

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

#77

OT from the headline, but I take issue with the author's claim that Bob Dylan's work doesn't relate to the theme "love fades". Dylan has had a vast career beyond his protest song days, and I'd argue that one of his best albums, "Blood on the Tracks" would be accurately summed up as "love fades".

I agree; OP is one of those articles, that start to make a reasonable point only to frame it with a highly debatable specific example.

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

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

So...one person died? Do you know how many people die in normal, non-self-driving cars? It's never possible to get 100% accuracy.

If those people die because the car fails catastrophically, and predictably, rather than the usual reasons it would be news. This is not about 100% or “the perfect is the enemy of the good” or any bullshit Utopianism. This is about a company marketing a flawed product deceptively for money, while letting useful idiots cover their asses with dreams of level 5 automation that aren’t even close to the horizon.

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

#79
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the big successes? Speech recognition? Which still seems rather bad to me. Language translation (which for the languages I’m interested in (Japanese) is still almost totally unusable? Self driving cars? Which are not yet in production (and where the social issues are probably far harder than the technical ones, and likely have been since the 90s). Is there some big application if ML that I’m missing that is…

Not sure what you are using, but speech recognition is amazing on my android device and has been for years. I rarely ever type anything into my phone anymore. It's a usability gamechanger.

> Not sure what you are using, but speech recognition is amazing on my android device and has been for years.

Let me guess: white male native English speaker? Your Android device was built by you and trained for you specifically.

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

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

So...one person died? Do you know how many people die in normal, non-self-driving cars? It's never possible to get 100% accuracy.

One person died from that accident. There are now at least 4 deaths where Tesla's autopilot was involved (most of the deaths in China don't get much publicity, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are more). And the statistics do not back up your claim that Tesla is safer (despite their attempts to spin it that way).
Post reply on HN