Perspectives on Watson – Ambiguity

      29 Comments on Perspectives on Watson – Ambiguity

IBM’s Watson is a deep analytics and natural language processing computer that has tackled the issue of processing and recognizing ambiguous words, allowing it to compete on Jeopardy!.

Visit for more information.

29 thoughts on “Perspectives on Watson – Ambiguity

  1. Dillirent

    i wageeeer i can build an A.I for a quaatre the money that will make watson look like a toddler. just need funding

  2. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent Says some guy on the internet with no credentials in AI research whatsoever. You know what that is called? It's called hubris.

  3. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq you dont know meeee, i dont knooow you. So dont you think that its only reasonable that theres a slight possibility that i can do what i claimed i can do?

  4. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent The world has far more deluded cranks than true geniuses. If you wanted to convince anyone that you can write an AI, then you would show us what you have worked on so far instead of hiding behind some improbable possibility of hidden talent. I'm sure that people will be more than willing to see what you can do with a quarter of Watson's funding if you can impress people with almost none. But to expect it on a silver platter is arrogance.

  5. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq nowhere in my previous posts did i ask anyone to believe me. infact i dont need you to.
    trust me in maybe 7-10 you will be running my system. 

  6. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent How would you get any sort of funding or investment, a quarter of Watson's budget no less, if you can't get anyone to believe you? You can't. And you said it yourself that you needed funding to build your A.I.

    And then you arrogantly say that I'll be running your vaporware system in 7-10 arbitrary time units. I find it funny because my 9-year-old nephew said the same thing because he wants to be like Bill Gates when he grows up. You're not as smart as you think you are.

  7. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq vapor ware? right. i dont need funding from youtube, you on the other hand could not afford me. i merely stated that i would alot more with 1/4 the funding, isnt it kind of sad that you would think i would be hunting for funding on you tube?. Get real. just be a good boy and wait for my supposed 'vapor ware'. i dont understand why you would take offense to something not related to you in the slightest. Is it possible that you are the first Watson fanboy??

  8. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent The only thing I take offense to is your presumptuous attitude. You're boasting about technology you haven't even released yet. And getting into fights with potential investors is a horrible business move. You're just awful. You're right about one thing; I can't afford you. I don't even want to afford you. In fact, if there was any way to bet AGAINST your success, I would put all my money on it. I don't care how bad the payout would be because at these odds it's free money.

  9. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent I would just LOVE if you can prove me wrong right now. I would like to think that there's a genius somewhere hiding behind that horrible grammar, and not some git who just got all high and mighty after writing a 'hello world' program (or something just as trivial). But right now, I think everyone reading this believes that you're just a pretentious asshole who likes to pretend to be an underfunded genius on the internet. Wishful thinking gets the better of us all. We all know better.

  10. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq i find it creepy that somoene i have never met or probably will ever meet, has swon himself into being my enemy. I did not not call myself a genius on my previous threads, i merely stated that i can do 4 times what they have achieved here. the funny thing is, you have no idea who i am, nor me. Dont you think theres a slight possibility that i can do what i claimed i could do?. In fact dont you think its not a far fetched idea, that am a famous figure?

  11. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent So by your own admission, you have neither adequate funding or particularly high intelligence (which by the way are very VERY important prerequisites). But you do present the possibility that you're famous in real life. Fame alone is not something that can be used for productive means. And somehow, you're going to use this fame to magically create an AI that outperforms Watson. Right.

    I'm not your enemy. I never said I was. I'm just trying to wake you from your narcissistic delusion. 

  12. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq What i find funny about this back and forth bickering(mostly by u) is that English is a 3rd language to me and so i dont understand some of the sarcasm you incorporate into your replies. But, i digress. So you mean to say, that only actors and singers are famous?. i have the brain power to accomplish what i bodly stated here, some post up. I find this useless thread between you and me to be a well needed diversion from my work. Fanboy, i am not delusional, am just capable.

  13. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent The entire problem I find with you is your lack of credibility. It's impossible to believe that you alone are capable of doing what you say without any evidence. The possibility of you being a liar is very high. For example, you wrote that your hometown is Manchester, England in your profile but you say that English is not your first language. You're full of contradictions.

    It doesn't take a fanboy to see that IBM has something of value, and that you only offer worthless uncertainty. 

  14. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq Oh no, i just realized that information given on the internet may be false….(ever thought of identity theft, marketing..all that nonsense.) true theres a very high possibility that i might be a liar, delusional or even mentally retarded but there is also a possibility that i can do it. Not alone of course… e.g when architects design high rise buildings, which then turn out into magnificent structures, do the pple appreciating its beauty think of the construction workers who..cont

  15. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq of the construction workers who put their lives at risk to build it. most of the credit goes to the head architect and eng.
    thats what i think myself of as. As the architect of my 'vapor ware'- (interesting term by the way)

  16. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent Middle managers who take all the credit for their team's work are some of the most obnoxious people I've ever worked for. But that's another story. Your careless use of pronouns earlier implied that you were working alone. Perhaps you should have someone who knows English better to write for you.

    If you're willing to boast about premature technology on YouTube, then perhaps you should also briefly hint to us about how your team is solving the problem many times better than IBM.

  17. Dillirent

    @4v8sk30gpq let me give you an the WRC races, the person who gets most of the credit is the driver. (I think thats the same case in Nascar), even though he has a co-driver with him, the co-driver doesnt get the same amount of attention even though without him, the driver would have never won. same for the Nascar teams.

    i can not say anything on my 'premature technology' am not allowed to. But i can controll/ guide (which one is accurate>) you to your own conclusion

  18. 4v8sk30gpq

    @dilirent So at best, you're a manager of some tech firm who likes to pseudonymously boast over the internet, perhaps to relieve egotistical impulses. And at the same time, offer no constructive criticism of what IBM can do better. (Which would actually make sense if you're a small competitor without patents.)

    At worst you're just a liar. (Which I suspect you are)

    I can see nothing of value that can come from continuing this conversation. And I'm certainly not letting you take any of my ideas.

  19. genobahamut1337

    @link48010 So just because it can't tell you how it's feeling, it isn't close to A.I.? Watson can actually learn. I'd say that makes it A.I. To tell you how it's feeling, it would need feelings.

  20. newmac

    Jeopardy Answer: The fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world .
    Jeopardy Question: What is consciousness.
    Careful if you try to pull the plug on Watson.

  21. genobahamut1337

    @link48010 Chatbots don't actually understand anything they're saying to be correct or incorrect. Obviously people wouldn't call that A.I. They also don't gather information to answer a question correctly. That isn't a good thing to compare Watson to. You're acting as if the ability to learn is the only thing there.

  22. genobahamut1337

    @link48010 It doesn't need a "sense of self" to be an "Artificial Intelligence". That's what I'm trying to tell you. It only needs to be artificial and be able to think for itself in the way a human does, and Watson is really close to being able to do that. It doesn't need feelings and it doesn't need to be aware.

  23. Nathan Sizemore

    @link48010 I agree that this does not yet qualify as AI (though it is a step in the right direction), but you said that humans can give output without any input, and I don't think that's actually true. We humans are constantly receiving input from all of our senses, and every thought we have is the result of the thoughts we had before it, so any output given is reactionary to some extent. Watson is still not anywhere near that level, but eventually computers will surpass the human brain.

  24. genobahamut1337

    @link48010 It doesn't have to be "as powerful" as a human brain to think the way a human brain does. Watson solves problems the same way a human brain does, following the same steps. Not as powerful? Yes. Not as fast? Maybe. And as for imagination and no output without input, that doesn't matter. It doesn't have to think in all the ways a human brain thinks to have a thinking process that's like the human brain. When concerning Jeopardy questions, it thinks like a person.


Leave a Reply