Is there somewhere to watch this online?
Found http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfNBWJTGEEA and it is good quality.
IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
141–150 of 154 posts
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize that if it were only to recognize speech, other players would have a significant time advantage because they can read the text in probably 1/10th of the time it takes the host to speak the question out loud. "Feeding" Watson the text is just another way of saying Watson "reads" the text displayed on the screen, just like every human is allowed to.
Well is the text "fed" in a word at a time, or the whole question as a block that takes nanoseconds to parse. That's an unfair advantage if so because because the computer is getting the data in a different format than the other contestants, who are handicapped since they have to preprocess the data in a way the computer doesn't because it has been preprocessed in advance for it.
[deleted]
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize that if it were only to recognize speech, other players would have a significant time advantage because they can read the text in probably 1/10th of the time it takes the host to speak the question out loud. "Feeding" Watson the text is just another way of saying Watson "reads" the text displayed on the screen, just like every human is allowed to.
Well is the text "fed" in a word at a time, or the whole question as a block that takes nanoseconds to parse. That's an unfair advantage if so because because the computer is getting the data in a different format than the other contestants, who are handicapped since they have to preprocess the data in a way the computer doesn't because it has been preprocessed in advance for it.
How are the two situations any different? Just because a program has an entire block of text in memory doesn't mean that it can instantaneously build all the data structures needed to process and make sense of it. We both "read," Watson's "reading" just takes place in its code.
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well is the text "fed" in a word at a time, or the whole question as a block that takes nanoseconds to parse. That's an unfair advantage if so because because the computer is getting the data in a different format than the other contestants, who are handicapped since they have to preprocess the data in a way the computer doesn't because it has been preprocessed in advance for it.
How are the two situations any different? Just because a program has an entire block of text in memory doesn't mean that it can instantaneously build all the data structures needed to process and make sense of it. We both "read," Watson's "reading" just takes place in its code.
It's very different. The humans have to decode the visual and aural representations before parsing for meaning can commence. The computer should have to do this too, but that step has been done in advance for the computer. This gives the computer a time advantage not because it was faster at computing, but because necessary computing was removed in advance from its task.
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can always be "awesomer". However, calling it half-assed I think is a bit harsh. The truly novel aspects of Watson are that in its abilies in to answer questions in a truly domian-free way. It is not trained to be an expert in a specific domain, but instead to calculate what it believes to be the best answer from any domain. This is truly novel and amazing. That it can do this with Jeopardy questions, regardless o…
"Watson can understand and answer better than the vast majority of humans on this planet." Only for extremely limited definitions of "understand".
Get back in your chinese room.
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#146"a';DROP TABLE 'knowledge'; This type of attack is commonly used by hackers." Game over, Watson.
Really, who would put a massive store of knowledge in a SQL database?
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are the two situations any different? Just because a program has an entire block of text in memory doesn't mean that it can instantaneously build all the data structures needed to process and make sense of it. We both "read," Watson's "reading" just takes place in its code.
It's very different. The humans have to decode the visual and aural representations before parsing for meaning can commence. The computer should have to do this too, but that step has been done in advance for the computer. This gives the computer a time advantage not because it was faster at computing, but because necessary computing was removed in advance from its task.
But it would be trivial to OCR the text in a few microseconds, so I don't see how it makes any difference at all to give the text to the computer...
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#148Suppose Watson scales cheaply (it doesn't), would it be serious threat to Google? My guess is that it would be but I'd be curious to hear HN's take.
I think it's fun to think about how Watson type intelligence will be at the average consumer's figertips (and affordable, to boot) in less that 20 years. A quick look at the TOP500 supercomputers puts about a 10,000x increase in raw flops since 1993. Using that as a rough benchmark (a very rough one), we're looking at some impressive stuff in the next twenty years. It's not unreasonable to think that: current consume…
For Reference:
The laptop I am typing on is more powerful (in terms of FLOPS) than Deep Blue.
(For that matter - so is every server in Watson)
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#149Shouldn't IBM start their own search engine if they have algorithms like this? Or conversely, maybe Google should buy them?
IBM should use this tech to one-up the content-scraper SEO junk sites. They should put out sites that are what the scraper sites purport to be and put them out of business.
Re: IBM's Watson starts on Jeopardy Tonight
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
The documentary mentioned that Watson does some speech recognition. It attempts to listen to the competitor's answers so that it doesn't give a wrong answer that was already given.
This is not true, apparently. Watson gave the same answer as another contestant (Ken).
The contestant said "20s", IBM Watson said "1920's" - both were wrong but one can see how Watson didn't recognise that the answer was the same, it wasn't.