3 ms·
Give me a break. You're complaining that better technology is a bad thing. The reason we have search algorithms is so we don't have to filter through tons of
by rcavezza 16y ago
Give me a break. You're complaining that better technology is a bad thing. The reason we have search algorithms is so we don't have to filter through tons of bad results. The better results an algorithm gives us, the less filtering we have to perform manually. Let the computer filtering get better so us humans can filter less.
If half seconds weren't important in search, Google would not have developed instant search.
- us 16y agoI agreed up till your last statement. They would have developed it if it meant more ad dollars as well.
- mechanical_fish 16y agoSure, improved search algorithms and speed are nifty. Watson is therefore nifty. What I dispute, however, is the point of the original suggestion: that Watson represents some kind of massive conceptual leap over Google, one that could translate into a threat to Google's business. Today, Watson has two advantages over Google's search engine: It plays Jeopardy -- which is a very impressive demo; it's hard to be impressed by Google search anymore now that kids have grown up with it -- and it gets to work on one question at a time using a profoundly expensive pile of special-purpose hardware. These things are awesome, but they are not actually magical. By the time Watson's tech becomes available on the web for everyone, Google may well have it too. By the time I can afford my own pocket Watson, Google may well be selling a competitor.