4 ms·
I can't see how that would be marketing. Most people would be more impressed if Watson could run on a laptop, today. I know I would.
by brisance 16y ago
I can't see how that would be marketing. Most people would be more impressed if Watson could run on a laptop, today. I know I would.
- gojomo 16y agoMore impressed? Yes. More willing to spend millions on hardware and software? No.
- wtallis 16y agoI can see IBM charging customers millions a year to keep their Watson database up to date, even if it ends up running on an x86 Linux box. When they adapt it for general Q&A use, Watson will probably be as useful as Wolfram Alpha wishes it was.
- brisance 16y agoAnd how would they look if, as the original poster surmised, it were possible for a competitor to produce something similar to Watson on today's laptop? IBM would've spent millions of dollars making themselves look very silly. It's a similar situation to moon-landing skepticism. If it didn't happen, it would be trivial for the Soviet Union to disgrace and discredit the achievement by faking their own.
- gojomo 16y agoNo other team was given a crack at the Jeopardy spotlight. IBM didn't win against a bunch of other teams for the slot on the human/machine faceoff; it was all orchestrated for them. So give others some time to emerge. I suspect in a year or two – perhaps sooner, if an organized open competition with real cash prizes is launched – we'll have a better idea of what a lean team could do on the trivia domain. It may not be reduced to a single 2011-equivalent laptop... but it might be a single 2011-equivalent maxed-out-server (rather than a Watson-like server room).
- blhack 16y agoMost programmers would, but any non-technical people would think that you could hire a programmer to do the same thing for $1000.