- Jan 6, 2008
- 9,531
- 0
- 30,780
IBM's Watson Has Gone to College
- Thread starter exfileme
- Start date
- Status
Northwestern
Distinguished
- Jun 17, 2011
- 373
- 0
- 18,790
[citation][nom]dameon51[/nom]I wonder how long until this tech is phone sized. Any of you Moores Law/math whizzes wanna crunch some numbers?[/citation]
20 years tops.
20 years tops.
[citation][nom]Northwestern[/nom]20 years tops.[/citation]
Sounds accurate but don't forget that they'll also find ways to make it more efficient, shave some features off for the mobile version, etc.
Sounds accurate but don't forget that they'll also find ways to make it more efficient, shave some features off for the mobile version, etc.
[citation][nom]dameon51[/nom]I wonder how long until this tech is phone sized. Any of you Moores Law/math whizzes wanna crunch some numbers?[/citation]
The problem isn't shrinking the technology down, it's getting the technology to the point anyone can use it. They Watson (and related systems) work is that the questions have to be properly formatted. Although Watson cleaned up in Jeopardy the questions are worded in a consistent manner and the machine was tweaked to be able to handle the questions. Even supercomputers have problems with natural language processing. Just look at Siri and it's equivalents, every request is sent to a server farm and even then it needs a properly formatted query.
We can build smart computers, but we've been working to build computers that can understand people for half a century. I figure we need another 15 or so years to have a big computer understand people, then another 7 or 8 to make it available on home computers (desktops/laptops) and another 7 or 8 for low power mobile devices.
The problem isn't shrinking the technology down, it's getting the technology to the point anyone can use it. They Watson (and related systems) work is that the questions have to be properly formatted. Although Watson cleaned up in Jeopardy the questions are worded in a consistent manner and the machine was tweaked to be able to handle the questions. Even supercomputers have problems with natural language processing. Just look at Siri and it's equivalents, every request is sent to a server farm and even then it needs a properly formatted query.
We can build smart computers, but we've been working to build computers that can understand people for half a century. I figure we need another 15 or so years to have a big computer understand people, then another 7 or 8 to make it available on home computers (desktops/laptops) and another 7 or 8 for low power mobile devices.
I'm impressed, but at the same time not so much. I would like it to be able to scan data on its own and try and solve complex problems without our help.
Basically like how we try and figure out what Dark matter really is, we'll tell it about dark matter and let it try and come up with ideas or discoveries by itself with it scanning and thinking.
But unfortunately we're far from that because it requires programming.. and tons of it.. For a machine to discover things by itself.. Wanting to discover, driven by curiosity?
Thats when i'll be even more impressed.
Basically like how we try and figure out what Dark matter really is, we'll tell it about dark matter and let it try and come up with ideas or discoveries by itself with it scanning and thinking.
But unfortunately we're far from that because it requires programming.. and tons of it.. For a machine to discover things by itself.. Wanting to discover, driven by curiosity?
Thats when i'll be even more impressed.
[citation][nom]ddpruitt[/nom]The problem isn't shrinking the technology down, it's getting the technology to the point anyone can use it. They Watson (and related systems) work is that the questions have to be properly formatted. Although Watson cleaned up in Jeopardy the questions are worded in a consistent manner and the machine was tweaked to be able to handle the questions. Even supercomputers have problems with natural language processing. Just look at Siri and it's equivalents, every request is sent to a server farm and even then it needs a properly formatted query.We can build smart computers, but we've been working to build computers that can understand people for half a century. I figure we need another 15 or so years to have a big computer understand people, then another 7 or 8 to make it available on home computers (desktops/laptops) and another 7 or 8 for low power mobile devices.[/citation]
Will it truly ever "understand" what is said or will it just processed based on its input and supply a proper response?
A machine would have to be aware to truly understand and comprehend what is said to it. Could that be achieved? Well, what is life? Where does it go from random movements in a molecule to life? Is life nothing more than a complex biological system? If so why can a complex mechanical system have life?
We have a basic programming in us just as a machine does, except ours can grow and expand on its own whereas machine today is extremely limited to what it can "learn" and how it can utilize that information.
Will it truly ever "understand" what is said or will it just processed based on its input and supply a proper response?
A machine would have to be aware to truly understand and comprehend what is said to it. Could that be achieved? Well, what is life? Where does it go from random movements in a molecule to life? Is life nothing more than a complex biological system? If so why can a complex mechanical system have life?
We have a basic programming in us just as a machine does, except ours can grow and expand on its own whereas machine today is extremely limited to what it can "learn" and how it can utilize that information.
rebel1280
Distinguished
- May 7, 2011
- 391
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]sacre[/nom]Will it truly ever "understand" what is said or will it just processed based on its input and supply a proper response?A machine would have to be aware to truly understand and comprehend what is said to it. Could that be achieved? Well, what is life? Where does it go from random movements in a molecule to life? Is life nothing more than a complex biological system? If so why can a complex mechanical system have life? We have a basic programming in us just as a machine does, except ours can grow and expand on its own whereas machine today is extremely limited to what it can "learn" and how it can utilize that information.[/citation]
YOUR A CYLON!
YOUR A CYLON!
aramisathei
Honorable
- Aug 25, 2012
- 303
- 0
- 10,810
[citation][nom]sacre[/nom]I'm impressed, but at the same time not so much. I would like it to be able to scan data on its own and try and solve complex problems without our help. Basically like how we try and figure out what Dark matter really is, we'll tell it about dark matter and let it try and come up with ideas or discoveries by itself with it scanning and thinking.But unfortunately we're far from that because it requires programming.. and tons of it.. For a machine to discover things by itself.. Wanting to discover, driven by curiosity? Thats when i'll be even more impressed.[/citation]
Isn't that how "The Matrix" started?
Isn't that how "The Matrix" started?
shadowfamicom
Honorable
- May 2, 2012
- 136
- 0
- 10,680
Only 15TB? It may be only text based data (not sure) but I expected way more then that. Even my main rig and smaller one have 15tb in 3tb drives when combined. (if you must know, 3D models, media and archived data going back to 2006). If you had told me Watson used closed to a petabyte I would have believed you.
shadowfamicom
Honorable
- May 2, 2012
- 136
- 0
- 10,680
[citation][nom]shadowfamicom[/nom]Only 15TB? It may be only text based data (not sure) but I expected way more then that. Even my main rig and smaller one have 15tb in 3tb drives when combined. (if you must know, 3D models, media and archived data going back to 2006). If you had told me Watson used closed to a petabyte I would have believed you.[/citation]
Okay just looked it up, the article is wrong. It's 15tb of RAM, not disk space. The Watson used in Jeopardy held 36 petabytes of data, not sure how much storage is in the ones being sent to this school is though. The consensus around the net is that all printed materials on earth would represent approximately 200 PB of information.
Okay just looked it up, the article is wrong. It's 15tb of RAM, not disk space. The Watson used in Jeopardy held 36 petabytes of data, not sure how much storage is in the ones being sent to this school is though. The consensus around the net is that all printed materials on earth would represent approximately 200 PB of information.
anti-painkilla
Distinguished
- Mar 29, 2011
- 1,022
- 0
- 19,460
[citation][nom]shadowfamicom[/nom]Okay just looked it up, the article is wrong. It's 15tb of RAM, not disk space. The Watson used in Jeopardy held 36 petabytes of data, not sure how much storage is in the ones being sent to this school is though. The consensus around the net is that all printed materials on earth would represent approximately 200 PB of information.[/citation]
I did think that was incorrect. He would fail Jeopardy if that was the case. Thanks for being onto it.
I did think that was incorrect. He would fail Jeopardy if that was the case. Thanks for being onto it.
vertigo_2000
Distinguished
- Feb 26, 2007
- 370
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]aramisathei[/nom]Isn't that how "The Matrix" started?[/citation]
"Number 5 is alive."
Johnny 5, Short Circuit
"Number 5 is alive."
Johnny 5, Short Circuit
ScrewySqrl
Champion
- Aug 2, 2010
- 11,199
- 232
- 53,540
[citation][nom]shadowfamicom[/nom]Okay just looked it up, the article is wrong. It's 15tb of RAM, not disk space. The Watson used in Jeopardy held 36 petabytes of data, not sure how much storage is in the ones being sent to this school is though. The consensus around the net is that all printed materials on earth would represent approximately 200 PB of information.[/citation]
How things have changed. I remember in my "Issac Asimov Book Of Facts' (c) 1980, that the entire contents of the library of Congress in 1980 was about 1 TB. Talk about an explosion of information.,
How things have changed. I remember in my "Issac Asimov Book Of Facts' (c) 1980, that the entire contents of the library of Congress in 1980 was about 1 TB. Talk about an explosion of information.,
I remember the first pc I built, Win 98, AMD k6-2 350mhz with 384mb pc100 a a 4 gig hdd.
I was told I would never need anything THAT FAST and I was out of my mind for putting that much ram in there, that never in a million years would I need more than 64mb!
Yup, yup, yup, things sure do change.
I was told I would never need anything THAT FAST and I was out of my mind for putting that much ram in there, that never in a million years would I need more than 64mb!
Yup, yup, yup, things sure do change.
mouse24
Splendid
- Nov 30, 2010
- 4,389
- 0
- 23,960
[citation][nom]shadowfamicom[/nom]Okay just looked it up, the article is wrong. It's 15tb of RAM, not disk space. The Watson used in Jeopardy held 36 petabytes of data, not sure how much storage is in the ones being sent to this school is though. The consensus around the net is that all printed materials on earth would represent approximately 200 PB of information.[/citation]
Wonder how much that would be if you compressed it. Since text archives nicely I think it could shrink down the size quite considerably. Then you would only need as much space as however much that takes up + the size of the largest file. (Though 200PB doesn't seem like much for a company of IBMs size)
Wonder how much that would be if you compressed it. Since text archives nicely I think it could shrink down the size quite considerably. Then you would only need as much space as however much that takes up + the size of the largest file. (Though 200PB doesn't seem like much for a company of IBMs size)
snowzsan
Distinguished
- Jun 9, 2011
- 154
- 0
- 18,690
The idea here is that they're programming it to listen and retain information base on user input and use said information to draw conclusions based on what it retained. Sure, every PC retains information inputted by the user but that requires the user to input the information themselves, where as this computer will do it for you, for itself. It's essentially "learning."
Given how this technology doesn't get much media attention (short of websites who specialize in it) I think this is amazing. A company doing something merely for the sake of doing it, not for the mass public to sit back in awe and wonderment.
Given what it does, it's impressive. It can call upon non-essential information and use it to derive a coherent and correct response all on it's own. Make all the jokes you want but to say this isn't impressive or to compare it to your home rig is just downright stupid.
Given how this technology doesn't get much media attention (short of websites who specialize in it) I think this is amazing. A company doing something merely for the sake of doing it, not for the mass public to sit back in awe and wonderment.
Given what it does, it's impressive. It can call upon non-essential information and use it to derive a coherent and correct response all on it's own. Make all the jokes you want but to say this isn't impressive or to compare it to your home rig is just downright stupid.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram