I found the link above to be a bit useless as it jumps right into getting answers with evidence. Here's a better overview link: https://developer.ibm.com/watson/docs/developing-watson-apis...
IBM Watson API
11–20 of 88 posts
Re: IBM Watson API
#12Has anyone at HN used either IBM Watson or Wolfram Alpha to build a real (commercial) app? It feels like there should be a whole wave of apps built on either of these technologies but it doesn't seem to be materialising. What is holding back the killer apps for answer/computation engines?
I've heard the turnaround for a Watson implementation is about a year. IBM is just too slow, that's why the flood of apps isn't yet materializing.
Re: IBM Watson API
#13If you want access to the API, you have to fill out a form, here: http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/ibmwatson/form_ecosys...
This is buried in the docs as a comment on this page: https://developer.ibm.com/watson/docs/developing-watson-apis...
Edit:
No real support for 'playing around' with the API. Bummer.
Edit2:
Just went through the application process linked above. Be prepared to give info about yourself and your company and an explanation of why you want access to the Watson API, as well as what type of information you'll be working with. I stated 'just want to play around with the API'. We'll see how they react to that.
Re: IBM Watson API
#14Has anyone at HN used either IBM Watson or Wolfram Alpha to build a real (commercial) app? It feels like there should be a whole wave of apps built on either of these technologies but it doesn't seem to be materialising. What is holding back the killer apps for answer/computation engines?
Google / Wolfram Alpha / Watson are great at answering broad questions.
1. "Who was the 12th president?" - Zachary Taylor 2. "What color wine is cabernet sauvignon?" - Red 3. "Is a ferret a rodent?" - The ferret is the domesticated member of the Order Carnivora, Family Mustelidae and Genus Mustela. A common misconception is that ferrets are rodents.
The real challenge is answering niche questions:
1. What size are the OEM rear wheels of a Honda S2000? 2. How can I fix MySQL error 1064? 3. How do I remove wine from a macbook?
These types of questions aren't answerable by a simple mining of Wikipedia or Encyclopedic knowledge. They represent niches within our society (S2000 owners, programmers, people who spilled wine on their macbooks). Google provides excellent links to pages that contain answers to these questions, but it cannot deduce a single answer or common response. This is why sites like Answers.com, Yahoo! Answers, StackExchange, etc. can flourish, but it's also why an NLP question and answer system is very difficult.
I've been working on a system to mine existing responses to questions - http://gotoanswer.stanford.edu - I only have a small subset of programming-related questions (~10M), but you can get an idea for what I'm trying to do by searching for "How do I remove wine from a macbook?" You'll see that there are results for removing wine the liquid and WINE the windows non-emulator.
Re: IBM Watson API
#15IBM is about to make these APIs (and many others) much more accessible as part of BlueMix (https://ace.ng.bluemix.net/ - the IBM PaaS/Heroku). I lead the team in charge of developing the Watson platform. Ask me questions!
Re: IBM Watson API
#16Out of curiosity I googled the same request. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22His+1983+h... . I think this might be useful if Watson was being feed with a medical database. Otherwise I don't see any need for it; is there any? edit: Watson as a legal consultant would be great. There might be a product in that, not as an replacement for a lawyer but more as guide/search tool.
I would think Watson can replace most lawyers (and MDs, and ...) of this world. Most of them don't think and just rehash stuff they learnt, just like Watson does. Sure for the exceptions you need actual people, but that is the same time when you would go from your corner lawyer to a more prominent one and when your doctor would forward you to an expert anyway.
The point is, that (hopefully) your doctor knows where his expertise ends and when to refer you to an expert. I'm not sure Watson could reliably do the same.
Re: IBM Watson API
#17Out of curiosity I googled the same request. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22His+1983+h... . I think this might be useful if Watson was being feed with a medical database. Otherwise I don't see any need for it; is there any? edit: Watson as a legal consultant would be great. There might be a product in that, not as an replacement for a lawyer but more as guide/search tool.
I would think Watson can replace most lawyers (and MDs, and ...) of this world. Most of them don't think and just rehash stuff they learnt, just like Watson does. Sure for the exceptions you need actual people, but that is the same time when you would go from your corner lawyer to a more prominent one and when your doctor would forward you to an expert anyway.
Conversation you will never hear in a Dr. office:
me: i have pain in my side
dr: 25%: something you ate 22%: appendicitis, 18%: kidney stone...
me: am i allowed to...
lawyer: 42%: Maybe, 38%: Yes, 20%: NoRe: IBM Watson API
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would think Watson can replace most lawyers (and MDs, and ...) of this world. Most of them don't think and just rehash stuff they learnt, just like Watson does. Sure for the exceptions you need actual people, but that is the same time when you would go from your corner lawyer to a more prominent one and when your doctor would forward you to an expert anyway.
Conversation you will never hear in a Dr. office: me: i have pain in my side dr: 25%: something you ate 22%: appendicitis, 18%: kidney stone... Conversation you will never hear in a lawyer's office: me: am i allowed to... lawyer: 42%: Maybe, 38%: Yes, 20%: No
This is only true when there isn't enough information supplied. You can't expect the doctor to figure out what the problem is just by telling the doctor you have a pain in your side, same goes for the lawyer's scenario.
Re: IBM Watson API
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would think Watson can replace most lawyers (and MDs, and ...) of this world. Most of them don't think and just rehash stuff they learnt, just like Watson does. Sure for the exceptions you need actual people, but that is the same time when you would go from your corner lawyer to a more prominent one and when your doctor would forward you to an expert anyway.
The point is, that (hopefully) your doctor knows where his expertise ends and when to refer you to an expert. I'm not sure Watson could reliably do the same.
Fed with enough medical knowledge, Watson would be the expert.
Re: IBM Watson API
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conversation you will never hear in a Dr. office: me: i have pain in my side dr: 25%: something you ate 22%: appendicitis, 18%: kidney stone... Conversation you will never hear in a lawyer's office: me: am i allowed to... lawyer: 42%: Maybe, 38%: Yes, 20%: No
This is only true when there isn't enough information supplied. You can't expect the doctor to figure out what the problem is just by telling the doctor you have a pain in your side, same goes for the lawyer's scenario.
Exactly. It's not that the doctors know anything more here, they just don't (can't) quantify their confidence (and later reliably update on new evidence).
No offense to doctors/lawyers meant here; all human brains suck at that.