5 ms·

> And the big bet on a ridiculously over-hyped Watson could make sense if you saw incomplete and underperfoming products as merely the top of a consulting sales

by 2sk21 7y ago

> And the big bet on a ridiculously over-hyped Watson could make sense if you saw incomplete and underperfoming products as merely the top of a consulting sales funnel I worked on Watson Assistant for a few years and it’s not a bad product at all compared to the competitors but, sadly, I have to agree with the above assessment. It was completely overhyped.

jimbokun 7y ago
Is there even a significant market for such a product?
- 2sk21 7y ago
  Not really until language understanding improves substantially. All of the chatbot kits that I’m familiar with discard the bulk of the information in the user’s first utterance.
- DebtDeflation 7y ago
  Yes. Chatbots (or "Virtual Assistants") for handling routine customer care inquiries. IBM Watson Assistant is the leader in this increasingly crowded (Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and dozens of startups are competing with them) space. The tech-savvy may look down at the current state of "AI chatbots" but large enterprises in all industries currently spend a fortune on staffing call centers that predominantly handle questions like "I forgot my password can you reset it?", "I lost my bill, can you send me another copy?", and "I'd like to sign up/cancel/modify a service". Chatbots work well enough to handle 30-40% of these types of inquiries at a far lower cost than a human (who is mainly just reading a script anyway).
  - sgt101 7y ago
    All of those 30-40% problems you cite are actually arguements for spending a bit on improved FAQ's, website processes and IVR's. Businesses are likely to react to a successful pitch for a solution in that space with a bit of cash to do it tactically. For chatbots to become a thing they will have to jointly solve problems with customers, and they can't just now...
    - DebtDeflation 7y ago
      Agree that more should be spent on better FAQs and better self-service search. But IVRs? No, just no. Most people start pounding the zero button and screaming "Agent" as soon as the IVR picks up, and if it doesn't immediately transfer them to a live agent they just hang up. It's a horrible customer experience.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  Since someone else addressed call centers, there's a million managers in blue collar fields that would kill for some software that can take in all their purchases and work orders (and those of everyone else who bought the software) and spit out insights like "don't piss your money away on the expensive grease Reddit told you to use, machines running the cheap stuff don't seem to cost anymore to operate". These are the kinds of things they could find out themselves if they wanted but can't justify spending the man hours.
  - HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
    Woah, that'd be awesome!
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- wenc 7y ago
  There is, but it's also served by a saturated market full of startups that are far more innovative than IBM. And much more inexpensive. My experience of IBM's software products is that they are slightly above average, comprehensively documented, but completely out of touch with market pricing. I wouldn't say they are affordable even for fairly large enterprises -- the bang for buck is extremely poor. IBM is the choice for large, price-insensitive, risk-averse companies and bureaucracies. You can almost always do better than IBM.
- tootie 7y ago
  I have a dumb idea. IBM should release an Echo/Alexa competitor with Watson branding. It should be brightly colored, made of metal with large-print buttons and be preprogrammed with older, male voice. Then they market it as home automation for Boomers. "Watson, open the lights." "Watson, how much of the green pill do I take?" "Watson, play Lou Dobbs."
  - rossdavidh 7y ago
    This is a better business strategy than the one they had the last decade.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    Buy Wolfram and integrate alpha into the Watson knowledge base.
    - ineedasername 7y ago
      Alpha looked so promising on release, but every time I've checked in on it, it just seemed like there was some tinkering around the edges and absolutely nothing fundamentally new or groundbreaking since its inception.

by 2sk21 7y ago

jimbokun 7y ago

Is there even a significant market for such a product?

2sk21 7y ago
Not really until language understanding improves substantially. All of the chatbot kits that I’m familiar with discard the bulk of the information in the user’s first utterance.
DebtDeflation 7y ago
Yes. Chatbots (or "Virtual Assistants") for handling routine customer care inquiries. IBM Watson Assistant is the leader in this increasingly crowded (Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and dozens of startups are competing with them) space. The tech-savvy may look down at the current state of "AI chatbots" but large enterprises in all industries currently spend a fortune on staffing call centers that predominantly handle questions like "I forgot my password can you reset it?", "I lost my bill, can you send me another copy?", and "I'd like to sign up/cancel/modify a service". Chatbots work well enough to handle 30-40% of these types of inquiries at a far lower cost than a human (who is mainly just reading a script anyway).
- sgt101 7y ago
  All of those 30-40% problems you cite are actually arguements for spending a bit on improved FAQ's, website processes and IVR's. Businesses are likely to react to a successful pitch for a solution in that space with a bit of cash to do it tactically. For chatbots to become a thing they will have to jointly solve problems with customers, and they can't just now...
  - DebtDeflation 7y ago
    Agree that more should be spent on better FAQs and better self-service search. But IVRs? No, just no. Most people start pounding the zero button and screaming "Agent" as soon as the IVR picks up, and if it doesn't immediately transfer them to a live agent they just hang up. It's a horrible customer experience.
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
Since someone else addressed call centers, there's a million managers in blue collar fields that would kill for some software that can take in all their purchases and work orders (and those of everyone else who bought the software) and spit out insights like "don't piss your money away on the expensive grease Reddit told you to use, machines running the cheap stuff don't seem to cost anymore to operate". These are the kinds of things they could find out themselves if they wanted but can't justify spending the man hours.
- HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
  Woah, that'd be awesome!
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
wenc 7y ago
There is, but it's also served by a saturated market full of startups that are far more innovative than IBM. And much more inexpensive. My experience of IBM's software products is that they are slightly above average, comprehensively documented, but completely out of touch with market pricing. I wouldn't say they are affordable even for fairly large enterprises -- the bang for buck is extremely poor. IBM is the choice for large, price-insensitive, risk-averse companies and bureaucracies. You can almost always do better than IBM.
tootie 7y ago
I have a dumb idea. IBM should release an Echo/Alexa competitor with Watson branding. It should be brightly colored, made of metal with large-print buttons and be preprogrammed with older, male voice. Then they market it as home automation for Boomers. "Watson, open the lights." "Watson, how much of the green pill do I take?" "Watson, play Lou Dobbs."
- rossdavidh 7y ago
  This is a better business strategy than the one they had the last decade.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  Buy Wolfram and integrate alpha into the Watson knowledge base.
  - ineedasername 7y ago
    Alpha looked so promising on release, but every time I've checked in on it, it just seemed like there was some tinkering around the edges and absolutely nothing fundamentally new or groundbreaking since its inception.