3 ms·
Ok, so Watson couldn't yet answer "How do you change the oil on an 77 Corvette?" any better than Google could, but it could conceivably answer the question "Wha
by dustyreagan 16y ago
Ok, so Watson couldn't yet answer "How do you change the oil on an 77 Corvette?" any better than Google could, but it could conceivably answer the question "What size sockets do I need to remove the oil pan of a 77 Corvette?" Is that trivia? I guess. But it's also practical knowledge that's time consuming to find in Google search.
Also, I could be wrong, but I imagine a large percentage of searches are for trivia. It wouldn't have to be all or nothing. Perhaps Watson answers trivia like questions in clear english. For everything else he returns all the resources he has that he thinks are related to the question, like Google does. Heck, maybe Google partners with IBM to license the tech. Google's already trying to answer some trivial questions outright in search, such as when you ask for a definition, unit conversion, or simple math. Watson could take that to a whole new level.
As far as a business model, I don't see why slapping an ad on where to purchase the correct size sockets you need online beside your answer wouldn't work.
- knowsnothing613 16y agoI agree.. come for the trivia.. stay for the search index after the top 3 trivia listings.
- brudgers 16y ago>"What size sockets do I need to remove the oil pan of a 77 Corvette?" Is that trivia? I guess. But it's also practical knowledge that's time consuming to find in Google search. Using Google or Watson is an inherently inefficient approach because it's trivial to find the most practical answer with a socket set and a mechanics creeper (and '77 Corvette). A shop manual doesn't hurt either.