We could have this if we chose it, and by ‘chose it’ I basically mean ‘moved to Europe’.
No, because if you do, it’s no longer arbitrary.
I’ve been in a quizzing program where, if you buzzed in early, you had to complete the question before you could give the answer. And, if you got it wrong, the penalty would be the same, but the question would be reread to the other team in its entirety, and they would be allowed to answer. (Unlike Jeopardy, this was not the case when the question is answered normally.)
Watson appears to come up with the top three possible answers almost immediately, but won’t buzz in unless “his” top choice is higher than 75-90% (it’s hard to detect the precise percentage, due to a VERY annoying banner ad which obscures Watson’s answers!) Humans, on the other hand, will take a stab in the dark, or buzz in before they’ve come up with the answer – and we humans can adapt our strategy on the fly, whereas the cold, emotionless computer merely waits for further data before letting the missiles fly. 
I bow down before you, silenus.
Would something like that be able to innovate novel ideas or is it limited to finding the answers that someone else has already discovered and written down in the database? I assume strictly the latter.
Even if limited to the latter, I can see how in 10 years when the hardware is affordable for consumers that it will make a huge difference in people’s lives. Especially in fields like medicine or R&D if the database is updated daily, since at least in medicine there is about a 2 decade delay between research and clinical practice.
But one that can come up with novel solutions (ie, it can create a novel solution to a question like ‘how do we expand human healthspan to 130 years’ as an example) is going to be far more interesting.
Here’s CNN.com’s article on it: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/10/man-vs-computer-a-gaming-history/?iref=allsearch
I wonder if anyone has asked Watson whether entropy can be reversed.
NOVA episode was good.
Indeed! As impressive was Watson may be now, a greater appreciation for the developers grows when you watch how the quirks get worked out. Seeing the machine improve its own logic and learn to focus on what are the most important aspects of the question, as opposed to its original search logic which often zoomed in on words that were essentially irrelevant to the clue, resulting hilariously incorrect responses, was great to watch.
When is it actually going to be on? The video in the OP was just practice.
I wonder what it would be like to have two computers and one human, and finaly three computers. If all three were the same would they all stalemate?
Next week! Feb 14-16.
The match is on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of next week.
FTW!
who wrote the old adage about computers and chess?( which can now be updated to include Jeopardy)
“both a person and a computer can win a great game of chess.
But only a person can enjoy it.”
The pleasure circuits are still prototypes.
Yes. Fascinating.
Christopher Reeve with a jar of acid behind his back is the tie-breaker.
WARNING! I got a virus (easily neutralized, but still) when I tried to play the video in the OP’s link (the second video on the page, I think – the one above the video of the two nerds.)