Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM Watson API

developer.ibm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: IBM Watson API

#81

Post by somberi »

pesenti wrote: post #51
somberi wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey there. The startup I co-founded has been accepted by IBM partner for Watson. A few weeks into it, we are still doing the "form-filling" marathon and have not had access to an instance. Seems like the API, when available to public will be a faster way to access it. Punekale at google's mail.

Not completely. The first set of APIs won't let you provide your own content - it will let you play with the Q&A API (and also do a lot of other fun things not directly related Q&A). The instance you will get access to through the application will let you provide your own content. We are working hard to make that available as self-service but that's going to take a little more time.

Thank you.

Re: IBM Watson API

#82

Post by beebs93 »

I sent a e-mail to my co-workers containing "...natural English to ask Watson..." and somehow people read it as "You can ask Emma Watson, who is English, a question and she will respond".

And I thought, "...close enough - Watson could answer questions about Emma".

Re: IBM Watson API

#83

Post by toomuchtodo »

TheCondor wrote: post #42
tluyben2 wrote: post #7

Earlier 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.

Seriously? Watson could replace lawyers or doctors for people that equate Google searches to legal advice or medical advice. Think legalzoom and webmd... Absolutely seems like it could be an entertaining way for a non lawyer or no doctor to explore a law or medical library. The majority on my time spent with lawyers has been discussing my issue until it could be distiled down to a couple concise legal questions; I bo…

Watson is already better at diagnosing cancer than human doctors.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-02/11/ibm-watson-me...

Human doctors need sleep. They get tired. They get old. You'll still need innovation in the medical field, but lets not kid ourselves that we need a gourmet chef in every McDonalds.

Re: IBM Watson API

#84

Post by bravura »

pesenti wrote: post #15

IBM 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!

Do you mind emailing me? My email is in my profile.

Re: IBM Watson API

#85

Post by nl »

aabajian wrote: post #14
malanj wrote: post #4

Has 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 th…

You should put your contact details in your profile (In the "About" section - your email address isn't publicly visible).

Anyway - I'm really interested in this area. I have Q/A system built that can answer (some of) the broad-type questions you mention.

I think grouping Google/Wolfram/Watson together misses that each has their strengths and weaknesses, and that they take dramatically different approaches.

Google traditionally relies on ranking information it finds to answer questions (though the whole knowledge graph thing is moving it closer to what Watson does).

Wolfram relies on manual curation of facts and probably the best "calculation" engine of the three.

Watson relies on manual curation of sources, and automatic extraction of facts and ranking of them.

I think it's quite interesting that Google is moving to a model more similar to Watson.

Anyway - I'd love to hear about your approach and what you are doing. My contact is in my profile.

Re: IBM Watson API

#86

Post by nl »

finin wrote: post #71
Rooster61 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bring up a good point, but it seems as if Watson was designed with this in mind. If you notice in the JSON response, it lists this query as a factoid class. It may handle different queries with different attributes differently, such as focusing on certain portions of its corpus or changing what aspects of its search results are more heavily weighed. A query identified as a factoid might be researched and judged v…

Factoid is a word coined by Norman Mailer for "an item of unreliable information that is repeated so often that it becomes accepted as fact". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factoid

In QA literature it is often used in the "unverified fact" sense (which is also mentioned in Wikipedia article).

The Wikipedia article says it well:

A factoid is a questionable or spurious (unverified, false, or fabricated) statement presented as a fact, but without supporting evidence, although the term can have conflicting meanings.

Re: IBM Watson API

#87

Post by tluyben2 »

ygra wrote: post #16
tluyben2 wrote: post #7

Earlier 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.

Well, MDs just send you away when stuff doesn't go away or they think it's serious; I think Watson can easily be instructed to do the same. If it belongs in the category 'probably needs expert' he should pass his conclusions about what it is and so on to a human expert. Similarly with the cough he subscribed medicine for and after 1 week it's not gone yet; expert. This is what human MDs do as well and I had MDs actually tell me to 'be a man, suck it up' so not sure if Watson could do worse.

Re: IBM Watson API

#88

Post by mark_l_watson »

logicalman wrote: post #66
pesenti wrote: post #15

IBM 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!

Is BlueMix a Heroku competitor or compliment? I want to develop on the Watson API but I also want to use a stack I'm familiar with. Also, do you have range estimates for the price of accessing the Watson API?

BlueMix is based on Cloud Foundry and is very easy to use. Pushed an app there yesterday as a test.
Post reply on HN