Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Your new overlord: IBM's Watson on Jeopardy tonight

MKRMKR Registered User regular
edited February 2011 in Debate and/or Discourse
http://www.jeopardy.com/minisites/watson/

Humanity's reign is near its end. Intelligent text processing will be our ruin.

http://www-03.ibm.com/innovation/us/watson/what-is-watson/index.html

The Hacker News thread answers a lot of questions: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2217022

MKR on
«13456

Posts

  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    its only a matter of time before it'll want to do trebek's mother

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • Void SlayerVoid Slayer Very Suspicious Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Can we put watson inside windows computers so it can tell us what the hell question error messages are suppose to answer?

    He's a superhumanly strong soccer-playing romance novelist possessed of the uncanny powers of an insect. She's a beautiful African-American doctor with her own daytime radio talk show. They fight crime!
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Can we put watson inside windows computers so it can tell us what the hell question error messages are suppose to answer?

    "Insufficient data for meaningful answer."

  • Void SlayerVoid Slayer Very Suspicious Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    MKR wrote: »
    Can we put watson inside windows computers so it can tell us what the hell question error messages are suppose to answer?

    "Insufficient data for meaningful answer."

    "What screen and data, shown to a computer user, will be both incomprehensible yet inspire rage and despair?"

    Also this seems like a nice advancement in an AI being able to understand human speaking patterns, universal translator anyone?

    No, superior spambots will be the real outcome.

    He's a superhumanly strong soccer-playing romance novelist possessed of the uncanny powers of an insect. She's a beautiful African-American doctor with her own daytime radio talk show. They fight crime!
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    just watched it(broadcasts here at 3:30)...really amazing. good job HAL, I wouldn't have believed you could do this good without having seen it.

  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    just watched it(broadcasts here at 3:30)...really amazing. good job HAL, I wouldn't have believed you could do this good without having seen it.

    did they put on veterans against it?
    that would really suck if you were one of those people who studied their butts off and waited years for a chance to be on the show only to get called up to play a goddamn computer

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • TehSlothTehSloth Looking for a girl who hates everything that I hate Except meRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    dlinfiniti wrote: »
    just watched it(broadcasts here at 3:30)...really amazing. good job HAL, I wouldn't have believed you could do this good without having seen it.

    did they put on veterans against it?
    that would really suck if you were one of those people who studied their butts off and waited years for a chance to be on the show only to get called up to play a goddamn computer

    Yeah, they pit it against Ken Jennings and someone else I don't know but who won a lot. It was interesting, it completely dominated the first half of the game and then was pretty poor in the second half.

    FC: 1993-7778-8872 PSN: TehSloth Xbox: SlothTeh
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited February 2011
    I can't wait to watch this; glad I stumbled across this thread.

    I'm curious to see how Watson handles the Stupid Anecdotes About Yourself segment of the show.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Didn't seem to be able to use the other players answers as clues

    like it tried to answer the same wrong answer a few times

  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Might want to save impressions until after the show for those of us in other time zones.

  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Watson getting the questions as text before Trebek even gets 2 words out seems patently unfair, as opposed to using speech recognition. Or if Watson is pre-programmed to know exactly when the "Answer Now" light goes on, rather than having to optically recognize it like a human would and physically press a buzzer using motors no faster than a human hand can move.

    Buzzer speed/timing is as important as actual knowledge on Jeopardy. During Ken Jennings' streak, he remarked that he felt he had an advantage over his challengers due to his familiarity with the buzzers. But this is supposed to display Watson vs humans as search engines, not buzzer-pressing machines. We already know machines can perform simple mechanical tasks much faster than people.

    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I'm curious to see how Watson handles the Stupid Anecdotes About Yourself segment of the show.

    <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

  • ImprovoloneImprovolone Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I loved Watson's first answer ("question") selection.

    OH COME ON!

    edit: Am I'm kind of annoyed that this isn't three full games. The last episode, if its just Final Jeopardy, will be boring as fuck.

    Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    That was not nearly as ego destroying, clue wise, as I was anticipating. The Ultimate Tournament of Champions made me very very sad. I got like half of these? Maybe 2/3.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I want to have a third type of contestant: random ignorant guy with a PC and an internet connection.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Searching the Web is slower than searching your own memory if you know it. Same with semi-simple math problems and a calculator.

  • AiouaAioua Novus Ordo Seclorum Lord of the ForumRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    BubbaT wrote: »
    Watson getting the questions as text before Trebek even gets 2 words out seems patently unfair, as opposed to using speech recognition. Or if Watson is pre-programmed to know exactly when the "Answer Now" light goes on, rather than having to optically recognize it like a human would and physically press a buzzer using motors no faster than a human hand can move.

    Buzzer speed/timing is as important as actual knowledge on Jeopardy. During Ken Jennings' streak, he remarked that he felt he had an advantage over his challengers due to his familiarity with the buzzers. But this is supposed to display Watson vs humans as search engines, not buzzer-pressing machines. We already know machines can perform simple mechanical tasks much faster than people.

    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I'm curious to see how Watson handles the Stupid Anecdotes About Yourself segment of the show.

    <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    Well, for one, players can read the text, too. They don't have to wait for Trebek to finish talking to know the question. I don't see that part as explicitly unfair. I imagine it takes Watson some amount of real-world time to parse the questions. The other part, yeah. Watson either thinks it knows the answer and it rings in first (from what I saw from the CES videos), or it doesn't ring in at all.
    And that's why we're playing for charity!

    life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
    fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
    that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we got booze
    bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
  • ImprovoloneImprovolone Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    That was not nearly as ego destroying, clue wise, as I was anticipating. The Ultimate Tournament of Champions made me very very sad. I got like half of these? Maybe 2/3.

    This too

    Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    BubbaT wrote: »
    Watson getting the questions as text before Trebek even gets 2 words out seems patently unfair, as opposed to using speech recognition. Or if Watson is pre-programmed to know exactly when the "Answer Now" light goes on, rather than having to optically recognize it like a human would and physically press a buzzer using motors no faster than a human hand can move.

    Buzzer speed/timing is as important as actual knowledge on Jeopardy. During Ken Jennings' streak, he remarked that he felt he had an advantage over his challengers due to his familiarity with the buzzers. But this is supposed to display Watson vs humans as search engines, not buzzer-pressing machines. We already know machines can perform simple mechanical tasks much faster than people.

    By the end of Jennings's run, they started giving his opponents more time with the buzzer to practice than usual, to try and counteract his experience with them.

    The buzz-in speed thing is a huge deal, it can easily decide who wins. If two contestants have roughly similar knowledge, it will decide who wins. So unless they put some work into ensuring that the computer didn't have an advantage there, the whole thing would be somewhat silly.

    EDIT: Though really it would just be about programming in a "reaction time;" having it search while the question is read is fair game.

  • TechBoyTechBoy Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:

    tf2_sig.png
  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    I want to have a third type of contestant: random ignorant guy with a PC and an internet connection.

    buck futter!

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • krapst78krapst78 Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    posted in wrong thread. sorry guys

    Hello! My name is Inigo Montoya! You killed my father prepare to die!
  • HyperAquaBlastHyperAquaBlast Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    MKR wrote: »
    Might want to save impressions until after the show for those of us in other time zones.

    Why not just read the thread after you have watched it? Sounds silly I know.

    steam_sig.png
  • So It GoesSo It Goes Well, that seems pretty ludicrous.Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    This was cool

    I love Watson, I totes want him to win

    NOPE.
    Vd0n7Bk.jpg
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    MKR wrote: »
    Can we put watson inside windows computers so it can tell us what the hell question error messages are suppose to answer?

    "Insufficient data for meaningful answer."

    :^:

    steam_sig.png
  • randombattlerandombattle Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Man I'm watching this now and it is really interesting. Watson is really impressive the only issues that seemed to crop up were the lack of input from what the other people were guessing and just a few things that you could tell weren't quite leading to the right answer.

    All in all amazing step towards some actually intelligent AI.

    itsstupidbutidontcare2.gif
    I never asked for this!
  • DJ Cam CamDJ Cam Cam Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    It always seems when people build a computer that can compete at a human level there have to be giant controversies that its cheating at the game.

    I can understand that with Deep Blue, due to the type of game chess is. Watson seems like a giant step forward from what the Deep Blue computer was capable of though. Its hard to see how its cheating at Jeopardy though when a human can put emotions and real world experience behind words, whereas Watson can only look through text after text.

  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    DJ Cam Cam wrote: »
    It always seems when people build a computer that can compete at a human level there have to be giant controversies that its cheating at the game.

    I can understand that with Deep Blue, due to the type of game chess is. Watson seems like a giant step forward from what the Deep Blue computer was capable of though. Its hard to see how its cheating at Jeopardy though when a human can put emotions and real world experience behind words, whereas Watson can only look through text after text.

    they've already taught it to love

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2011
    I don't see why Watson should have been required to use voice recognition, since a deaf contestant could also compete on Jeopardy by reading the board.

  • chiasaur11chiasaur11 Never doubt a raccoon. Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    dlinfiniti wrote: »
    DJ Cam Cam wrote: »
    It always seems when people build a computer that can compete at a human level there have to be giant controversies that its cheating at the game.

    I can understand that with Deep Blue, due to the type of game chess is. Watson seems like a giant step forward from what the Deep Blue computer was capable of though. Its hard to see how its cheating at Jeopardy though when a human can put emotions and real world experience behind words, whereas Watson can only look through text after text.

    they've already taught it to love

    Great.

    Next it'll learn to hate.

    Worse possibility? It may start pondering its own existence.

    Then?

    Rampant.

    2MyOx.png
  • Michael VoxMichael Vox Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    The last broadcast we'll see is, "What is 'I just downloaded myself to the internets. Oh noes, humanity. Oh noes.'"

  • tofutofu Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Am I the only one that wants to see three Watsons face off against one another?

  • chiasaur11chiasaur11 Never doubt a raccoon. Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    tofu wrote: »
    Am I the only one that wants to see three Watsons face off against one another?

    Might be fun.

    But naming them all Watson? Confusing. Let's leave that name to the original. New ones need new names.

    Let's see. A scientist wouldn't be a bad chance. Let's go with an astronomer. Seeing the stars and suchlike. Tycho Brahe seems fitting considering where we're posting.

    Maybe an inanimate object for the second. Sword of legend or something for intimidation. Not Excalibur or Cortana, too cliche. Maybe Roland's sword. Indestructability of learning or summat.

    And why not a girl name for the third one, add some diversity. Let's go with a Doctor Who reference. Cavewoman was Leela, right? For the double Futurama reference points.

    Should be an interesting set-up.

    2MyOx.png
  • GimGim Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I heard an interview on the radio today with Jennings and Rutter. They claimed that in the practice matches that Watson did poorly on laundry detergents.

    So just remember when Skynet is sending wave after wave of exoskeletons to wipe out your human resistance cell, your only hope is Cheer with colorguard.

    F9RE9J8.png
  • tofutofu Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Clearly the other two systems would be named Sherlock and Moriarty

  • ImprovoloneImprovolone Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Ken clearly realised that Watson is bound to get the answer and that his only chance is to beat him on the buzzer.
    Trebek: Ken!
    Ken: Um, I don't know... the 20s?

    Ken buzzes in no matter what!

    Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
  • SorensonSorenson Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    tofu wrote: »
    Clearly the other two systems would be named Sherlock and Moriarty
    And for Final Jeopardy, Alex whips out a question with Irene Adler as the answer and Sherlock promptly crashes and burns.

    EDIT: In all seriousness though it would be fascinating to watch how each of them computes the question and checks out data and the like. Would they all come up with the exact same answers, buzz in at the exact same instances? Or is there enough variability that they'd come up with a wider range of solutions?

    Gamertag, Crackdown metatag, and other interesting stuff below!
    Join the Wang Defense Force and help stop the insect menace!
    Help a poor bastard out! Read (or at least visit) my Bright Hub articles!
    Spoiler:
  • HedgethornHedgethorn Associate Professor of Historical Hobby Horses In the Lions' DenRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I loved Watson's first answer ("question") selection.

    OH COME ON!

    edit: Am I'm kind of annoyed that this isn't three full games. The last episode, if its just Final Jeopardy, will be boring as fuck.

    They said at one point they're playing two games over three days. I figure the first two days will probably be one game, in order to have plenty of time to talk about the technology, and the third day will likely be a complete game.

  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    If they all use the same algorithms, configurations, and inputs, the answers should always be the same.

    They would have to program some kind of personality into each to give them any kind of variability.

    Hey, entropy. We're back at the joke I made earlier.

  • LaOsLaOs Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Didn't seem to be able to use the other players answers as clues

    like it tried to answer the same wrong answer a few times

    It doesn't actually hear anything, so has no way to "know" what the other contestants answered.

  • LaOsLaOs Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Ken clearly realised that Watson is bound to get the answer and that his only chance is to beat him on the buzzer.
    Trebek: Ken!
    Ken: Um, I don't know... the 20s?

    Ken buzzes in no matter what!

    Yeah, between Watson and the other guy (who actually held his own with Watson), Ken started trying to game the system just by being the first to buzz in. Kind of fun to watch him pull the right answer out of nowhere when he clearly didn't know it before buzzing in (but he still didn't end up doing too well).

    Did the other guy beat Ken in any of those tournaments he won?

«13456
Sign In or Register to comment.