IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
Summary: Ken Jennings foreshadowed the inevitable with his final Jeopardy answer. The answer: Bram Stoker. The subtext: "I for one welcome our new computer overlords."
IBM's Watson computer ultimately proved to be too much for the humans in Jeopardy.
Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter, two of the most successful players in Jeopardy, put up a spirited fight, but ultimately couldn't hang. Jennings foreshadowed the inevitable with his final Jeopardy answer. The answer: Bram Stoker. The subtext: "I for one welcome our new computer overlords."
The two day totals highlighted the extent of the victory for Watson.
- IBM's Watson had $77,147 at the end of two days.
- Jennings had $24,000.
- Rutter rounded out the festivities with $21,600.
Heading into the final Jeopardy round it appeared that Jennings had some momentum. But then Watson won a flurry of questions that appeared to suck the momentum out of Jennings.
The final Jeopardy category was 19th century novelists.
And the answer: William Wilkinson's "An Account of the Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia" inspired this author's most famous novel.
The question---all three contestants got right---was Who is Bram Stoker? The ever-precise Watson wagered $17,973.
In the end, Watson was a natural on Jeopardy. It was even likeable with his quirks---very precise wagers and a robotic voice. If Watson is ultimately our computer overlord he at least seems jovial.
Related: IBM's Watson wins Jeopardy practice round: Can humans hang?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
I doubt that, as this is nothing spectacular or new.
But then Watson isn't a single being: He basicly is hundreds of people, so from that standpoint still nothing I look at with any type of fascination.
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
So Watson cannot stretch the rules like Ken did, buzzing in then umming and arring for a second or two.
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
Slight clarification: "Until after Watson has determined and selected it's most likely answer."
Now, when and how does Watson receive the question text packet? All at once (at start, some time in middle or end of question reading) or as Trebek reads the question word for word? Or what other time release method?
Progenitor blues
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
This challenge was easier than it appeared
Turning English in to recognizable computer instructions was a more impressive.
Every question should have included a captcha box which had to be correctly answered.
RE: This challenge was easier than it appeared
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
I, for one, welcome our new digital overlords.
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
Overlord?
Artificial Intelligence
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
RE: IBM's Watson victorious in Jeopardy; Our new computer overlord?
hears the rub on that.....
from sayings of aaron "people are flawed,people create computers therefor computers are flawed"
personally, this is my take on artificial intelegance.....and current computer design.
"AI in any true form is not possible with the current computer technology in use today, nor will it ever be because structure is to limited, the best that will ever be achieved is AI like programs and even that will require massive massive amounts memory,Terra flops and data access......and thats OK...whats really not ok is the inference that true AI is possible with current computer tech. , this creates the general belief AI involved in the product coming from the computer it's just not very complex but can and will become so in time....while all thats possible is that in time all that can be expected is for it to become more AI like.....don't get me wrong. i have not problem with the technology and encourage it's development , where the issue lies is there is nothing good or to be gained by confusing the understanding what is TRUE AI and what is AI LIKE....ie..it's ease and more efficient to have a clear understanding from the start than it is have to restructure what you've learned and what it applies to after you have acquired a large of amount knowledge in that sublect.........personaly i believe the lack of this clarification is and will be among the top factors contributing to the slow development all AI related technolidgys......again, I'm all for all forms of AI and pseudo AI development and my comments are meant as positive with the best intent.....aaron