|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
Who is Watson? Or the Future is here 2.
February 18th, 2011, 17:31
Guest
February 18th, 2011, 17:37
Originally Posted by pibburIBM also invented Hard Drives, DRAM, Fractals, Relational Databases, RISC, …
On the contrary. IBM has a very advanced research department. It was at IBM@Zürich the scanning tunneling microscope was developed for which the two inventors won the Nobel price in physics in 1986.
--
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
February 18th, 2011, 17:38
On the contrary. IBM has a very advanced research department. It was at IBM@Zürich the scanning tunneling microscope was developed for which the two inventors won the Nobel price in physics in 1986.IBM also invented Hard Drives, DRAM, Fractals, Relational Databases, RISC, …
also 1986 ?
They also had the deep blue chess playing computer. System Z and such a things. Which is kind of unique. But I still don't associate them with fast and cutting edge…. not anymore. I would have like to see how long it would have taken google to win the jeopardy challange….And for what it's worth: I can't see how internet acess would have made it any easier for Watson, because as BillSeurer explaied so well: The challenge is not the search, but deciphering what it's about.Again related to the difference in questions between the versions I suppose. But I still think something like google and other internet services would help for a lot of questions. Even if Bill had some good samples were it probably wouldn't.
February 18th, 2011, 18:02
1986? Huh?
--
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
February 18th, 2011, 23:41
what I meant to say with a bit of a exegeration is that all of those things are quite long ago…
February 18th, 2011, 23:50
They are the fundamental building blocks of most of today's computer systems (ok, not fractals, fractals are just cool). And things like Blue Gene, Roadrunner, Watson, and etc. are the future of advanced computing.
IBM had almost 6,000 US patents last year and has had the most patents for the past 18 years. More than Microsoft, HP, Oracle, EMC and Google combined.
IBM had almost 6,000 US patents last year and has had the most patents for the past 18 years. More than Microsoft, HP, Oracle, EMC and Google combined.
--
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
February 19th, 2011, 01:00
Actually, the computer might find the Swedish version more difficult; assuming it's all done in Swedish!!
--
If God said it, then that settles it!!
Editor@RPGWatch
If God said it, then that settles it!!
Editor@RPGWatch
February 19th, 2011, 01:12
I was going to say the same, of course. But I'm just too poilite.
To Australia! Cheers!
EDIT: Sorry, I forgot the smiley.
To Australia! Cheers!
EDIT: Sorry, I forgot the smiley.
Guest
February 19th, 2011, 12:11
IBM had almost 6,000 US patents last year and has had the most patents for the past 18 years. More than Microsoft, HP, Oracle, EMC and Google combined.That is indeed impressive. But I still can't think of a recent IBM product that got a lot of buzz… after 2001 or something? well, except watson of course…..
February 19th, 2011, 14:51
Doesn't say much about what they're doing. Take for instance J. Georg Bednorz who in 1987 received the Nobel price in physics for "his discovery of high-temperature superconductivity in a new class of materials".
He's still at IBM, now working on "the development of complex oxide compounds with novel crystal structures and their specific modification for possible implementation in microelectronics." Highly advanced and important work, but not the kind that creates a lot of buzz.
OTOH, they developed the PowerPC tri-core processor used in XBox 360, and the Broadway CPU in Nintendo Wii. And the Cell BE microprocessor used in PS3 together with Toshiba.
So, I think it's safe to say that they have very competent people at their research and development departments.
He's still at IBM, now working on "the development of complex oxide compounds with novel crystal structures and their specific modification for possible implementation in microelectronics." Highly advanced and important work, but not the kind that creates a lot of buzz.
OTOH, they developed the PowerPC tri-core processor used in XBox 360, and the Broadway CPU in Nintendo Wii. And the Cell BE microprocessor used in PS3 together with Toshiba.
So, I think it's safe to say that they have very competent people at their research and development departments.
Guest
February 21st, 2011, 03:31
Originally Posted by GothicGothicnessIBM doesn't deal much in consumer products directly. Once something becomes a commodity they get out. Thus their exits from manufacturing of desktop PCs, laptops, consumer printers, hard drives, and etc. If you look at the history of companies in those businesses it seems a wise decision.
That is indeed impressive. But I still can't think of a recent IBM product that got a lot of buzz… after 2001 or something? well, except watson of course…..
That said a lot of what goes on under the covers of consumer products is developed by IBM. As was pointed out all 3 current generation video game processors are by IBM (and all are related to what is used in Watson, too, BTW).
--
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
Jagged Alliance 2 is alive!
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board…?ubb=cfrm&c=11
February 21st, 2011, 10:06
Well, IBM is still selling a lot of system Z and such a systems, and also linux clusters which are based on their own hardware. I guess I should have given them more credit. They also have quite a lot of different software such as doors, WAS, MQ, DB2 and so on…..well IBM still feels old and stable… DB2 was still using text files up until recently………………
But either way…. I would think for something such as searching for knowledge and decipher knowledge and language…. on the software side none is anywhere near google ?
But either way…. I would think for something such as searching for knowledge and decipher knowledge and language…. on the software side none is anywhere near google ?
February 21st, 2011, 11:55
Originally Posted by GothicGothicnessDoes google decipher knowledge/language? Isn't it mainly just a search for strings, and ranking the results (which it does very effectively)?
Well, IBM is still selling a lot of system Z and such a systems, and also linux clusters which are based on their own hardware. I guess I should have given them more credit. They also have quite a lot of different software such as doors, WAS, MQ, DB2 and so on…..well IBM still feels old and stable… DB2 was still using text files up until recently………………
But either way…. I would think for something such as searching for knowledge and decipher knowledge and language…. on the software side none is anywhere near google ?
Says Pibbur, who doesn't know, but who notices that google returns a lot of irrelevant results.
Guest
February 21st, 2011, 12:04
Does google decipher knowledge? Isn't it mainly just a search for strings, and ranking the results (which it does very effectively)?They do a lot more than that. In order to give good rankings Google have to try to decipher some knowledge… to get a good category and ranking of pages. Although it certainly not easy… they don't only base their results on number of links and such a things.. although the weight of links is too high IMHO.
You also have initiatives such as google translate which translates languages and speech. On top of that you have google ads, which tries to guess what your emails are about and give you the best ads. Their things are a lot more sophisticated than "good at searching for strings".
Granted a lot of their success is that many of their algorithms are behavior driven, if A, B, C from this target group likes tea.. it is likely D would do so too.
February 21st, 2011, 12:20
Ahh, now I know that.
Still it leaves a lot to be desired, a human handles information far better. And that's what Watson as far as I can see tries to accomplish, information processing on a nearly human level Which it seems to have done farily well, using Jeopardy as an example of what it can do.
Still it leaves a lot to be desired, a human handles information far better. And that's what Watson as far as I can see tries to accomplish, information processing on a nearly human level Which it seems to have done farily well, using Jeopardy as an example of what it can do.
Guest
February 21st, 2011, 12:32
We'll see perhaps this will lead to Instant Better Mastersearch ( IBM ) you write what you want in a normal sentance and it finds it.
Google has been trying but it doesn't work nearly as well as other parts of their search.
"How much does the coffee cost at my closest starbucks?" ( Not that it doesn't work isn't saying IBM has done a better job…. after all google couldn't use that kind of watson processing power for a single search or it would be out of business in a heart beat )
Only a matter of time before I can find out
( it is not that easy to know acctually as their isn't a starbucks in my city )
Google has been trying but it doesn't work nearly as well as other parts of their search.
"How much does the coffee cost at my closest starbucks?" ( Not that it doesn't work isn't saying IBM has done a better job…. after all google couldn't use that kind of watson processing power for a single search or it would be out of business in a heart beat )
Only a matter of time before I can find out
( it is not that easy to know acctually as their isn't a starbucks in my city )
February 21st, 2011, 12:35
Without knowing any of the particulars, I assume this is about filtering knowledge and getting as many positive matches as possible - and combining it with semantically correct forms of questions - as in "who is, what was…" etc.
So, it processes the input and the information returned is guaged based on the amount of similar hits. Then, the machine needs to figure out if something is a name, title, or similar - which is pretty easy if you search for something like "his, her, he did, he said, etc…" in correlation with the name - and similarly for other typical categories.
Algorithms like that combined and in the end returning the most likely combination.
By no means a trivial task to program, but ultimately not at all something that would impress me.
There's a gigantic difference between that, and actually simulating a thought process - or something else resembling real human responses.
But maybe something is going on here that I'm not aware of.
Having watched several versions of Jeopardy - I must say I feel pretty confident that I would be able to answer 9 times out of 10 within 10 minutes, if I had access to that much information and a search engine like Google. That's because Jeopardy is always about relatively common knowledge - and answers will naturally be readily available on the net. Maybe some trick questions would be harder, but I don't see the problem in general.
I say the net, because that's exactly corresponding to endless amounts of books, if you're a computer. A human being would need a lot more time with an actual book, based on the physical requirement of flicking pages. But a computer would consider the data identical.
So, all in all, not really exciting - but amusing
So, it processes the input and the information returned is guaged based on the amount of similar hits. Then, the machine needs to figure out if something is a name, title, or similar - which is pretty easy if you search for something like "his, her, he did, he said, etc…" in correlation with the name - and similarly for other typical categories.
Algorithms like that combined and in the end returning the most likely combination.
By no means a trivial task to program, but ultimately not at all something that would impress me.
There's a gigantic difference between that, and actually simulating a thought process - or something else resembling real human responses.
But maybe something is going on here that I'm not aware of.
Having watched several versions of Jeopardy - I must say I feel pretty confident that I would be able to answer 9 times out of 10 within 10 minutes, if I had access to that much information and a search engine like Google. That's because Jeopardy is always about relatively common knowledge - and answers will naturally be readily available on the net. Maybe some trick questions would be harder, but I don't see the problem in general.
I say the net, because that's exactly corresponding to endless amounts of books, if you're a computer. A human being would need a lot more time with an actual book, based on the physical requirement of flicking pages. But a computer would consider the data identical.
So, all in all, not really exciting - but amusing
Guest
February 21st, 2011, 12:38
Originally Posted by GothicGothicnessBut that's what Watson tries to do. The simple "he played Jack in Titanic" is the Jeopardy way of asking the question: "Which human actor played the character named Jack in the movie Titanic, released in 1997" (although the phrase doesn't say all this explicitely, that's how we interpretes it)
We'll see perhaps this will lead to Instant Better Mastersearch ( IBM ) you write what you want in a normal sentance and it finds it.
Google has been trying but it doesn't work nearly as well as other parts of their search.I knew that of course.
"How much does the coffee cost at my closest starbucks?"
Only a matter of time before I can find out( it is not that easy to know acctually as their isn't a starbucks in my city )
Watson told me.
Guest
February 21st, 2011, 12:50
But that's what Watson tries to do. The simple "he played Jack in Titanic" is the Jeopardy way of asking the question: "Which human actor played the character named Jack in the movie Titanic, released in 1997" (although the phrase doesn't say all this explicitely, that's how we interpretes it)Yes that was my point…….
I knew that of course. Watson told me.You had better tell me right a way or I'll ehh, I'll go to waynes!!!! ( it is worth to note I don't drink coffee though )
February 21st, 2011, 12:55
Guest
|
|
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:57.

