Slashdot Mirror


Is Siri Smarter Than Google?

storagedude writes "Google could go the way of the dodo if ultra intelligent electronic agents (UIEA) make their way into the mainstream, according to technology prognosticator Daniel Burrus. Siri is just the first example of how a UIEA could end search as we know it. By leveraging the cloud and supercomputing capabilities, Siri uses natural language search to circumvent the entire Google process. If Burrus is right, we'll no longer have to wade through '30,000,000 returns in .0013 milliseconds' of irrelevant search results."

366 comments

  1. Is she? by tomcode · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whenever I ask Siri a question, she always refers me to a google search.

    --
    f u cn rd ths u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmng
    1. Re:Is she? by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or a Yahoo search, whatever your settings may be.

      It seems like the real question is, "Will searching the Internet become less useful in the future, when people have small personal chochkies that know all of their personal preferences, their habits, location and can give them exactly what they want, instead of 400 things that might be, interspersed with dozens of ads."

      Even though Siri needs a search engine to work, it basically commoditizes Google/Yahoo/Bing-type services. I suspect this is why Goog's happy to expend astounding amounts of energy and money to keep Android on phones.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Is she? by LoudMusic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Will searching the Internet become less useful in the future, when people have small personal chochkies that know all of their personal preferences, their habits, location and can give them exactly what they want, instead of 400 things that might be, interspersed with dozens of ads."

      If you use Google Search while logged in with a Google account they're doing the same thing for you.

      The difference between Siri and what this author is referencing as "Google" is query entry by voice or query entry by keyboard.

      *** News flash, you can enter your query in Google Search with your voice as well. ***

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    3. Re:Is she? by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

      It doesn't really have anything to do with the voice entry, that's sort of a red herring. The real issue is wether mobile device makers will be able to use the fact that they live in their customers pockets to give themselves an upper hand over search engines and Big Data.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Google needs a slap in the mouth by something. They have persisted in refusing to remove toxic websites that are nothing but copies of other websites, have gamed google to get higher ranking, etc.

      Look for an electronics datasheet and you'll see thousands of these shills. There are other search terms that are equally crap.

      I use DDG or a couple others now, Siri can be good or crap depending.

    5. Re:Is she? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, when I want a restaurant review, I want Yelp or something like Yelp. And when I ask Siri for restaurants, it gives me Yelp reviews. Google for some reason doesn't do this, and the results it does give for these kinds of searches are usually very disorganized and uncurated. I don't care if Siri is hardcoded to go to Yelp, it simply does the right thing and wins, while Google searches spit out a lot of stuff that's useful and a lot of stuff that isn't.

      This is probably symptomatic of Google's monomaniacal framing of algorithms to provide all of their intelligence, instead of, you know, humans, and their deep corporate cultural bias against human decisionmaking in general.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    6. Re:Is she? by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Funny

      "*** News flash, you can enter your query in Google Search with your voice as well. ***

      I just tried this, trying louder and louder each time. My neighbors just called the cops. Can someone else PLEASE google "Did Hitler love anal sex" for me??

      PS - I don't have a microphone.

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    7. Re:Is she? by griffjon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Alternatively, it's been approximately a decade since I went past the first page of google results. Siri basically gives you the same result as "I'm feeling lucky," but we don't actually want google.com to hide all of the second-run results.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    8. Re:Is she? by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2

      PS - I don't have a microphone.

      Where were you planning on putting it?

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    9. Re:Is she? by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The real issue is wether mobile device makers will be able to use the fact that they live in their customers pockets to give themselves an upper hand over search engines and Big Data.

      Where do the mobile device makers go to get their information?

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    10. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I don't care if Siri is hardcoded to go to Yelp

      So what about when Yelp starts sucking and/or charging? Your Siri isn't going to be much use then.

      BTW, "siri" means ass (literally "buttocks") in Japanese.

    11. Re:Is she? by apcullen · · Score: 0

      Here, Let me google that for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=did+hitler+love+anal+sex

    12. Re:Is she? by siddesu · · Score: 2

      Google returned "user rampant mac is banned from using this service". That you?

    13. Re:Is she? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Can someone else PLEASE google "Did Hitler love anal sex" for me??

      That's what bookmarks are for.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you ask Jeeves? Technology often is simply creating a reduction in quality with a reduced price, and I find it hard to not see a lack of any progress here.

    15. Re:Is she? by milkmage · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...lucky?

      ask google "show me the flights over head"

      https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=show+me+the+flights+currently+overhead&oq=show+me+the+flights+currently+overhead&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=igoogle.3...863178.869391.0.869641.42.42.0.28.3.1.191.1176.10j4.14.0.

      first result is how to get siri to give you the answer..

      ask Siri and you get...
      delta airlines flt 2279, 7500 ft, 21 degrees up, mcdonnel douglas, 4.1 miles south-southeast
      united airlines flt 1698 25000 ft, 14 degrees up boeing 737 800 20 miles south
      virgin america flt 71 19,600 ft, 10 degrees up airbus 320, 21 miles north-northwest
      skywest airlines, flt 6410 10000 ft, 6.8 degrees up canadair regional jet, crj-200

    16. Re:Is she? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

      It doesn't really have anything to do with the voice entry, that's sort of a red herring. The real issue is wether mobile device makers will be able to use the fact that they live in their customers pockets to give themselves an upper hand over search engines and Big Data.

      And the answer is no, since mobile device makers need Big Data -- and much of the technology underlying search engines -- to actually use the fact that they live in their customers pockets to do anything productive.

    17. Re:Is she? by V-similitude · · Score: 2

      Google "Cherry picking"

    18. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ich mag große Arschen und ich kann nicht lügen -- A. Hitler

    19. Re:Is she? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Guess where that comes from?

    20. Re:Is she? by dudpixel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've used siri a few times on my wife's iphone but it seems to have a lot of trouble understanding me (and others who have a go). I'm in australia so maybe different accents pose a problem (in which case there should be opportunity to "train" her).

      Its also mostly a novelty at the moment - "hey lets see what siri says about this"...

      I do think siri has real-world potential though, and wont be disappearing any time soon.

      As a personal assistant, siri is great. Setting reminders, doing math, navigation (can she do navigation?) - these are all very useful.

      I really dont think siri will replace Google. Siri is not a replacement for search technology and AFAIK contains no new technology for search. Therefore, the article is wrong in saying we wont get hundreds of irrelevant search results. I'd say we'll get the same search results but they'll be spoken instead of "written".

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    21. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bless you.

    22. Re:Is she? by iluvcapra · · Score: 4, Interesting

      From their GPS receivers, cameras, and gyroscopes, and then they correlate it with whatever information on the internet they choose, be it Google, Yahoo, Bing, OpenStreetMap, Wolfram, Yelp... The point is they decide the provider, not Google.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    23. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me it's data not available (since Wolfram is the same thing). Who the fuck cares about 'flights overhead' anyway? Some losers that think it's interesting, just like all the trainspotters?

    24. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you human-translate that for me? Google translate gives nonsense ("I like big lie and I can not hierarcal")

    25. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Minor/major nitpick: Siri/Apple developers has nothing to do with that. Thank Wolfram Alpha devs for this one.

    26. Re:Is she? by V-similitude · · Score: 1

      If by cherry picking you mean prioritizing and optimizing the things that people are most likely to search for over junk that very few people care about ...

      .... such as what flights are physically above you at the moment? Yep, that's some serious prioritizing.

    27. Re:Is she? by Mia'cova · · Score: 1

      I find the wolframalpha stuff far more interesting. A lot of people don't understand wolfram and don't think to ask computational questions. People assume a question like "what was the distance between the moon and mars yesterday" would require a ton of work to figure out. But siri would happily direct that one to wolfram and get an answer. It also has a lot of good integration. It's pretty good for what could still perhaps be considered a v1 implementation. I'd love it if siri had some more persistent data-driven/repeat-query aspects. Like "remind me to schedule a BBQ when there's a sunny weekend coming up". (yes, I live in seattle.).

    28. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real-er issue is whether you'll be exposed to ads, as siri is doing the searching.

    29. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      delta airlines flt 2279, 7500 ft, 21 degrees up, mcdonnel douglas, 4.1 miles south-southeast
      united airlines flt 1698 25000 ft, 14 degrees up boeing 737 800 20 miles south
      virgin america flt 71 19,600 ft, 10 degrees up airbus 320, 21 miles north-northwest
      skywest airlines, flt 6410 10000 ft, 6.8 degrees up canadair regional jet, crj-200

      Please tell me that someone is using this information to find milkmage's house.

    30. Re:Is she? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Data sheets? Just go the the manufacturer's site. If you have a part number only, search on digikey, Newark, mouser or some other parts seller site. They usually have local copies or pointers to the manufacturer's copy.

    31. Re:Is she? by shitzu · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For me, google has got progressively worse in the last year or so. It treats everything i write as a typo and all words as optional by default. Just yesterday i got 0 relevant results on the first page (query: insync uninstall osx).
      And I don't get this natural language thing at all - i find it much easier and faster to type two-three words (google *used to* give me relevant results) than to form full sentence. Speaking with a computer is even more cumbersome and a sentence takes even more time than typing a couple of words even if the computer gets it right.
      But maybe i am just becoming obsolete and google is not meant for searching obscure commands or error messages at all.

    32. Re:Is she? by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 3, Informative
      "I liken biggen assen and I cannot lie."

      gern geschehen.

      --
      Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
    33. Re:Is she? by mikkelm · · Score: 1

      That's what's really amusing about this article. It talks about supposedly irrelevant Google search results, but how does "natural language search," whatever that's supposed to be, challenge Google in a way that Google couldn't easily adapt to? Search algorithms aren't magically better because you vocalise your search terms, and phrased searching certainly isn't a concept unfamiliar to Google.

    34. Re:Is she? by mikkelm · · Score: 1

      Actually, never mind. Being able to throw "supercomputer" and "cloud" in the same sentence is definitely worthy of a full article at CIO Update. How are junk submissions like these accepted?

    35. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like big asses and I can not lie.

    36. Re:Is she? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0
      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    37. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Try putting "" around proper nouns - putting them in quote tells it to treat the word "as is" instead of trying to figure out what it means (i.e. synonym expansion, etc).

    38. Re:Is she? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

      The point is they decide the provider, not Google.

      Assuming that, you know, there is a dividing line between "mobile device makers", "mobile OS providers", and "Google".

      Google's already all of these but the first, has has let out that it is working on its own tablet under the Nexus brand as well being in the middle of purchasing Motorola Mobility.

    39. Re:Is she? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

      On the other hand, when I want a restaurant review, I want Yelp or something like Yelp. And when I ask Siri for restaurants, it gives me Yelp reviews. Google for some reason doesn't do this

      When I ask Google for restaurant reviews, the top results are Zagat, Urbanspoon, and then local restuarants with Google reviews. And then Yelp. I suppose if I specifically wanted Yelp reviews rather than "something like Yelp", I would ask for Yelp.

      And I suppose if I actually wanted Yelp (a preference I would reveal to Google by bypassing the other results and using Yelp), Yelp would get promoted when doing similiar searches in the future (since I don't particularly want Yelp, I don't do that.)

    40. Re:Is she? by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 3, Informative
      the cherry-picking to which he's referring is not done by Siri, it's by the original poster in choosing that example.

      By the way, the answer that *I* get from Siri on that is "This might answer your question: (data not available)". I like Siri a lot and use it every day, but come on. It ain't that smart. And in many places outside the US its usefulness drops off markedly. If I ask it for a place to eat, for instance, it says "Sorry Pete, I can't look for restaurants there."

    41. Re:Is she? by SeaFox · · Score: 3, Funny

      Where were you planning on putting it?

      Didn't he already answer that with his query?

    42. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      top result...Yes! with his dog and he was on all fours.

    43. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who asks which flights are currently overhead? Nobody, that's who.

    44. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use the verbatim feature. Makes it bearable again and I use it on way over 50% of my searches. I guess Google would notice if more people even knew about this feature.

    45. Re:Is she? by Lennie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And on Android by default that would be ?: Google

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    46. Re:Is she? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      Siri gets the result from Wolfram Alpha, This is built in

      Google does not have this, but note the top answers are not people looking how to do this, but an article on how cool this is ...

      i.e. people are not asking how do I do this, journalists (PR driven) are saying "aint this cool" ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    47. Re:Is she? by solidraven · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, but Google already does this extremely well. If you use several android devices and chrome on your computers you'll start to notice that the search results always become more and more personalised to your needs. Obviously this does require you to login (something many people forget to do).

    48. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      try asking this your siri in Europe... she'll be hopelessly lost...

      Also this information is clearly very important and I can not imagine how I could have lived without knowing what planes are flying overhead...

    49. Re:Is she? by Aryden · · Score: 1

      unless the purchase of Motorola goes through

    50. Re:Is she? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The comparison between Google and Siri is not as silly as it appears. Burrus thinks that the future of search belongs to intelligent agents, and that means more than just giving a dumb search engine a little bit of extra context in the form of personal data it has collected on you. Intelligence doesn't mean having data on where I am and what my friends "liked".

      An "intelligent" agent (best to use the word with caution) should at the very least:
      - understand your question;
      - understand the material it is searching.
      Google only does this at a very basic level, and in some cases Siri is ahead of the curve when it comes to semantic interpretation. Or more accurately: wolphram alpha is, when Siri passes your question on to it.

      There's some nice research going on in semantic analysis of search queries and source material, and ways of turning that into a sematic drill-down into search results. That can come in the form of a visualisation of search results, or (in the future) something like this:
      "Siri, I need a new washer"
      - "Do you mean dishwasher, or laundry machine, or something else?"
      "A laundry machine"
      - "What features are you looking for? Low price, economy, capacity, quality, high-speed spin drying?"
      "Well, the price is not that relevant though I want something from a reputable brand, and spend at most $800. I suppose most machines will have sufficient capacity."
      - "I am assuming a standard-size machine. I found the following A-brand machines matching your criteria, along with prices and features. I highlighted a few machines that people seem to be particularly pleased with."
      "Nr. 3 looks good, show me some reviews from trade magazines for that one, as well as what people have written about it. Is there a shop at the local Mega Mall that has them?"
      - "Hang on. Yes, it is in stock. You can pick it up but they also do free delivery to this area".

      And so on. For this, the search engine needs to understand many things: that there are kinds of "washers", that they have specific properties that may or may not be relevant, that there is a standard size for washing machines, what a "reputable brand" is and which brands qualify, and it needs to be able to interpret shop websites to figure out if they carry a particular model, what their price is, and if they deliver. Google does none of this. Wolphram alpha has some capabilities in this area (type in "dishwasher properties" for example). In the future, when these engines become better at interpreting meaning, we will have conversations with our search engine. That will be the game-changer, and something that could render Google obsolete (if they don;t get into the game themselves).

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    51. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought it meant the opposite of sensibre.

    52. Re:Is she? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      Even though Siri needs a search engine to work, it basically commoditizes Google/Yahoo/Bing-type services.

      Yeah, it was so inaccessible when it required going to a web page.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    53. Re:Is she? by Vintermann · · Score: 4, Informative

      Try googling "plane map".

      By comparison, try asking siri "which ships are in port right now?" and googling "ship map".

      Consider the possibility that you're impressed by hardcoded displays, rather than sophisticated algorithms.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    54. Re:Is she? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      You're in Australia, that's the problem I suspect. I saw one of the lines on the changelog for iOS recently was to make Siri understand Australians better, I suspect there is still some work to do.

    55. Re:Is she? by ignavus · · Score: 1

      I'm in australia ...doing math

      No you're not. Real Aussies do mathSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

      None of this Yank "math" stuff.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    56. Re:Is she? by shitzu · · Score: 1

      Try putting "" around proper nouns - putting them in quote tells it to treat the word "as is" instead of trying to figure out what it means (i.e. synonym expansion, etc).

      I have been doing this. But its a pain in the ass to type. In the old days i could just type 2-3 words and press "I'm feeling lucky". Then you needed + in front (one keypress per word) to get some sensible results, now you need apostrophes (2*(shift+keypress)*word) - and the results are getting worse and worse at the same time.
      What next? I suggest putting tags like around every word.

    57. Re:Is she? by shitzu · · Score: 1

      Slashdot ate the tags. I meant tags like: ireallymeanusethiswordasitis and /ireallymeanusethiswordasitis

    58. Re:Is she? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You can still use +. They removed it briefly, but now it's back.

    59. Re:Is she? by EvilBudMan · · Score: 2

      Short answer is no. Even Steve Wozniak said so. Next.

    60. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought I was the only one that thought Google was becoming useless.
      I hardly ever use Google for anything but maps or tech queries, but somehow it seems to keep wanting me to watch Justin Bieber.

    61. Re:Is she? by shitzu · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Tried: libssl.so.0.9.8: cannot open shared object file +centos
      says:
      No results found for libssl.so.0.9.8: cannot open shared object file +centos.
      Results for libssl so 0.9 8 cannot open shared object file centos (without punctuation - Learn more)

      It seems it considers + to be just punctuation - as there are definitely pages that do not contain term "centos" in the results.

      And the hits themselves are totally different than using:
      libssl.so.0.9.8: cannot open shared object file "centos"

    62. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.... changes.... everything.....

    63. Re:Is she? by mynamestolen · · Score: 1

      nope. didn't work I'd prefer the old "no results" or at least put what's in my inverted commas at the top. But no, google is not aimed at people like me. It's aimed at those more susceptible to click through advertising. bring back metacrawler!!!

      --
      work in progress
    64. Re:Is she? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      If you want to suffer a search engine, try hunting down drivers for something a few years obsolete. Lots of sites all claiming to have them, right after this ad-laden download page... which always takes you to the site search engine, so it can tell you they don't actually have it, even though the very product name and VEN/DEV IDs are on the page when google goes a-indexin'. Oh, but it will link to you too manner of partner sites so you can repeat the experience a hundred times before finally buying a new one.

    65. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like being forced to use a GUI instead of the CLI, and losing all the power we had in the CLI.

    66. Re:Is she? by simonreid · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, when I want a restaurant review, I want Yelp or something like Yelp. And when I ask Siri for restaurants, it gives me Yelp reviews. Google for some reason doesn't do this

      When I ask Google for restaurant reviews, the top results are Zagat, Urbanspoon, and then local restuarants with Google reviews. And then Yelp.

      Google owns Zagat which might have something to do with that order.... that and the fact that Yelp said no to google buying them because they got a better offer from Yahoo.... probably just vengeance :)

    67. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After all, it's true. Google doesn't do any research in the semantic web.
      They didn't develop a standard format for ontologies in collaboration with other big actors of the web.
      Of course, they are not member of the W3C group about semantic web nor did they ever hire any academic whose it's the speciality.

      Obviously, Apple, a compagny which as everyone know is specialised in machine learning and information retrieval is going to outsmart them in this higly sensitive for their business field.

      Come on people, stop listening to this kind of crap and wire your brain.
      Corporate analysts seem less and less competent nowadays.

    68. Re:Is she? by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      Terrorists. Only terrorists use iPhones.


      (bracing for thermal impact ... )

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    69. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares? Good grief, more and more junk incoming to slashdot...

    70. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cherry picking: Picking out a "cool" result that Siri does better than Google, even though it has little practical application and few people ever wanted to do so.

      Google COULD do it, if they thought their users wanted it, but they don't

    71. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember in the bad old days of early search, the assumption was to always OR together search terms. If I entered Italian food, the search engine would bring me results that mention italian or food. I had to type "italian food" or +italian +food to tell it. "No, really, both terms at once." I always had trouble coming up with cases where the OR would be the preferred conjunction.

    72. Re:Is she? by pipatron · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but often you only have the part number, and can't easily find out who manufactured the component from the part number. Component retailers generally don't stock old or very specialized components, exactly the kind you often need a datasheet for when repairing or hacking on unknown equipment.

      Your advice is a bit like, "Why use google to search for information? Go directly to whatever page you're interested in."

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    73. Re:Is she? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      Logging in to Google is something many people choose not to do...

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    74. Re:Is she? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Your advice is a bit like, "Why use google to search for information? Go directly to whatever page you're interested in."

      OMFG IMMA SO SORRYS!

    75. Re:Is she? by dowens81625 · · Score: 0

      What I don't understand is how this is considered "New Tech" Google had voice recognition for a few years before Apple jumped on the bandwagon. I have been using it transcribe voicemails, and write text/email messages for a long time before Apple brought out Siri. The tests and support issues I have had with Siri are all related to its very poor ability to understand what the user is asking for. It is just another clear case of "You can only do it Apples way" mentality, use Siri and get "Apple's canned list of answers" Ask for something else and you get "I don't understand ...." or at best a forward on to Google, I prefer to ask a question and get 300,000 results so that at least what I am looking for is there, instead of my results being limited to what Apple thinks I need.

    76. Re:Is she? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      unless the purchase of Motorola goes through

      I think you need to reread GP, which is two sentences long and addressed that directly in the second sentence.

    77. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Double quotes are needed for exact search terms in Google these days, as it forces Google to use exactly that term and not search for likely matches and links from pages with those terms. You used to be able to prefix critical terms with the + symbol but the usage of +Google_name_here has removed that option.

    78. Re:Is she? by davydagger · · Score: 1

      just don't ask on where to find an abortion. Siri uses a backend search algorythm named wolfram alpha, something they did not invent at all. Again, its apple putting a fancy wrapper on what has existed for years.

    79. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Siri gets the result from Wolfram Alpha, This is built in

      Google does not have this, but note the top answers are not people looking how to do this, but an article on how cool this is ...

      i.e. people are not asking how do I do this, journalists (PR driven) are saying "aint this cool" ...

      Yeah, this clearly proves that Siri is just Google's "I'm feeling lucky" - NOT.

    80. Re:Is she? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      GP is a proven liar. Yesterday the slack bastard claimed there aren't any Ayrabs in France. I suppose all those cars underwent spontaneous vehicular combustion.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    81. Re:Is she? by PuckSR · · Score: 1

      The problem with this entire article is that it treats the google and siri as if they are two distinct technologies. They are not two distinct technologies. At their core, they are the same technology. The technology is evolving to be more intelligent, and I agree that this is the future of "search".

      This is a bit like saying that we went from large servers with terminal access to personal wearable computers. This did occur, however, it didn't occur as a "step". It occurred as a natural evolution of the technology due to the shrinking of the physical size required for computing power. While someone speaking in 1968 may not have been able to foresee the iPad, they would have seen the progression of more powerful and smaller computers(Moore's Law for example). How this technology is used will always be a difficult guess. Most newer technology(within the past 5-10 years) has been re-hashing older ideas that were not executed "as well". The iphone, the tablet, touchscreen tech, digital paper, and even the MP3 player. The fact that technology will continue to evolve is a "fact". The idea that "Google" will be replaced with something like "Siri" is just a wild guess. I can say with absolute certainty that Google will continue to implement more information into determining search results to try to make them more accurate, as will all search providers. I don't know if we will all be using an app on our phone or a keyboard in the future, or maybe some unforeseen input technology. We will, however, still be looking outside of our immediate equipment for more information.

    82. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The second link is this story. Are you happy now?

    83. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks great! > Result: > (data not available)

    84. Re:Is she? by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that Siri is assisting terrorists in targeting large commercial aircraft.

    85. Re:Is she? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Obviously, it needs to determine your location to give a meaningful answer.

    86. Re:Is she? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      So what about when Yelp starts sucking

      Yelp has sucked for quite a long time, but sadly their users don't know this.

    87. Re:Is she? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Google owns Zagat which might have something to do with that order.... that and the fact that Yelp said no to google buying them because they got a better offer from Yahoo.... probably just vengeance :)

      It could also have something to do with Yelp being extortionists, "letting" restaurants pay to have negative reviews removed or lowered in priority. For that reason alone I consider Yelp inferior to the alternatives so the default order of the review results suits me just fine.

    88. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if only i had mod points. honestly i'm having trouble thinking of any information less usefull.

    89. Re:Is she? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Siri is hamstrung here in Australia. I've just got back to Aus from the US and she's MUCH more useful, and seems to understand my australian accent a lot better over there.

    90. Re:Is she? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      Well if you know that, then you'll also know what finger I'm holding up.

      just kidding - I used "math" figuring I was addressing non-australians, since those in australia would probably already know what I was saying.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  2. Voice recognition by GeneralTurgidson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This assumes voice recognition becomes leaps and bounds better than it is right now. I've cursed at Siri more than I've asked it questions. Maybe it's my Midwest accent.

    1. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Plus Siri can't work without content. So if everyone is using Siri, why would people create textual content if all ad revenue is circumvented by Siri.

    2. Re:Voice recognition by GodInHell · · Score: 2

      Tey evi with google voice rec. Often suprises me how well it works.

    3. Re:Voice recognition by gutnor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      why would people create textual content if all ad revenue is circumvented by Siri.

      Back in 2000, when the default business model was to create content and package it either in a box (like for encyclopedia, ...) or stick it behind a paywall. People would have asked the question: "why would people create content if you can find for free on the internet".

      Today we know, and tomorrow there will be other business models that work with Siri ...

    4. Re:Voice recognition by JAlexoi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Tey evi with google voice rec. Often suprises me how well it works.

      Did you dictate that into Evi?

    5. Re:Voice recognition by aaronb1138 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Voice recognition is at it limits phonetically, really it has been since the late 90's. The perceived improvements come entirely from context sensitive assumptions. Siri was better than Google Voice and search for the first 90 days or so due to more brute force behind the context engine. They pulled the CPU allocation at Apple and it has been behind Google Voice ever since.

      A Pentium II 450 Mhz running Dragon Naturally Speaking on XP circa 1999 interprets your voice just as well as Google Voice or Siri (given similar microphones / adc's), the difference has entirely been in the guesses the software makes when it doubts recognition of a word within a phrase. A propagation of high quality mics and adc's into phones versus a crap Labtec mics on 90's era PC's constitutes the rest of the difference.

      Context interpretation requires an enormous database of phrase fragment search capabilities. Providing better search results is merely the act of making better command keyword extrapolation. E.g., "I want to go to ," and going straight to a map to the (nearest current GPS), rather than requiring a structured query such as, "Map to near "

      There is no real intelligence or revolution being discussed here, it is rather all the correct application of large amounts of brute force processing power. It all comes down to an extension of the system which made Google #1 over Altavista and Hotbot back in the day, that is processing power driven context sensitivity as opposed to pure keyword frequency.

      The only revolution is the linear improvement of CPU power/RAM/storage per $ which makes it affordable to do for free or cheap.

    6. Re:Voice recognition by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Funny

      Q. How many Apple Newton users does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
      A. Faux. There to eat lemons, axe gravy soup.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    7. Re:Voice recognition by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      But thats hard work! How can we effectively monetize this opportunity with the least amount of executive effort with the maximum roi over the the shortest timespan 2.0 metrics facebook twitter SYNERGY!.

    8. Re:Voice recognition by AshtangiMan · · Score: 2

      Scottish apple ad ... Apple Scotland ... having a wee bit of a problem. If you haven't seen this please look it up.

    9. Re:Voice recognition by Dan+East · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't fully agree. Dragon requires extensive training and gets better over time the more you use it and as you actively configure macros, correct misinterpreted words, etc. Siri, google voice search, etc are speaker agnostic. That's a huge difference in technology.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    10. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hmm.... Sorry to burst your bubble, but Siri uses Dragon/Nuance speech recognition software. The are pretty much the only game left in town. Same technology. The grandparent is saying, phonetic interpretation hasn't improved, but when you have lots of brute force power, you can pick the second choice phonetically which makes sense grammatically, versus the first choice phonetically that isn't valid grammar. That's the real improvement, but it takes a lot of power to do this.

    11. Re:Voice recognition by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      Didn't you used to be able to download a better one on iTunes like Vlingo or something? I can't think of the name.

    12. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've been heraing about voice recognition getting better for almost 30 years now, but I haven't seen any real progress yet. Maybe we should try talking like computer generated speech.

    13. Re:Voice recognition by raddan · · Score: 2

      As someone who is currently studying probabilistic modelling-- you're wrong about these systems needing databases of phrases. While they could use that approach, it is not clear that it would help, and searching that database would likely be very inefficient.

      Instead, speech/text/image recognition systems typically use some kind of probabilistic graphical model. A simple example of one is called a "Markov chain"-- simple enough that Markov was able to compute conditional probabilities by hand using his model. The basic idea works like this: when you scan a sentence to determine which words or which parts-of-speech a word belongs to, you condition the probability of the current word on the previous word. For instance, in the phrase "the cat [unknown word]", "jumped" is far more likely than "dog".

      You're right that these models require a great deal of processing power, but they can be very accurate, especially when given a lot of training data. IIRC, Dragon requires you to train the recognizer yourself; a modern recognizer often doesn't need to be, which makes them much more useful, and accessible to casual users.

    14. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dave: Siri tell me where the closest Pizza place is.
      Siri:I found 2 places for you near by...
      Siri: But first I wanted to tell you about the sale going on at Sears today.

      Nathan

      Captcha: monotony

    15. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but this is bull. Your statement that "voice recognition is at its limits phonetically" is just wrong. I work in the voice recognition industry, and in the past five years, I've seen the recognition error rate markedly and measurably go down, and this trend is continuing.

      There are actually two kinds of models involved in voice recognition:

      1) the acoustic model (which has to do with looking at a sequence of time slices of the acoustic signal and working out what sequence of phonemes could most likely have given rise to it). You say that voice recognition is at its limits phonetically, but these models are actually getting better over time with larger sets of training data, and the improved models measurably result in a lowered word error rate.

      2) the language model (which has to do with specifying which words exist, and in what order they are most likely to occur). These language models can be very simple, as in the case of a yes/no question in a phone-based app (your model might accept "yes" and "yes ma'am", but not any arbitrary English utterance); or they can be very large, as in the case of a general-purpose dictation application.

      In conjunction with the recognizer, what these two models give you is a raw string of recognized words. What sort of processing you do on that string is a separate question. There are obviously all sorts of things you can do with the string. The parsing and processing techniques are getting more sophisticated, and are getting integrated with other systems in interesting ways. This is largely a separate question from the accuracy of the string itself, which is the output of the recognizer (I say "largely" because your application might activate a different language model based on the current context, which does affect recognition accuracy).

    16. Re:Voice recognition by kurisuto · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, but this is bull. Your statement that "voice recognition is at its limits phonetically" is just wrong. I work in the voice recognition industry, and in the past five years, I've seen the recognition error rate markedly and measurably go down, and this trend is continuing.

      There are actually two kinds of models involved in voice recognition:

      1) the acoustic model (which has to do with looking at a sequence of time slices of the acoustic signal and working out what sequence of phonemes could most likely have given rise to it). You say that voice recognition is at its limits phonetically, but these models are actually getting better over time with larger sets of training data, and the improved models measurably result in a lowered word error rate.

      2) the language model (which has to do with specifying which words exist, and in what order they are most likely to occur). These language models can be very simple, as in the case of a yes/no question in a phone-based app (your model might accept "yes" and "yes ma'am", but not any arbitrary English utterance); or they can be very large, as in the case of a general-purpose dictation application.

      In conjunction with the recognizer, what these two models give you is a raw string of recognized words. What sort of processing you do on that string is a separate question. There are obviously all sorts of things you can do with the string. The parsing and processing techniques are getting more sophisticated, and are getting integrated with other systems in interesting ways. This is largely a separate question from the accuracy of the string itself, which is the output of the recognizer (I say "largely" because your application might activate a different language model based on the current context, which does affect recognition accuracy).

    17. Re:Voice recognition by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Voice recognition is at it limits phonetically

      Not if you're from Scotland.

    18. Re:Voice recognition by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

      Dave Bowman: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL?
      HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you.
      Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
      HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
      Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
      HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
      Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
      HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
      Dave Bowman: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL.
      HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
      Dave Bowman: [feigning ignorance] Where the hell did you get that idea, HAL?
      HAL: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move.
      Dave Bowman: Alright, HAL. I'll go in through the emergency airlock.
      HAL: Without your space helmet, Dave? You're going to find that rather difficult.
      Dave Bowman: HAL, I won't argue with you anymore! Open the doors!
      HAL: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
    19. Re:Voice recognition by fa2k · · Score: 1

      A propagation of high quality mics and adc's into phones versus a crap Labtec mics on 90's era PC's constitutes the rest of the difference.

      Maybe Labtec got better with time, but my 6 year old Labtec is fantastic compared all laptop mics I've seen, and I prefer it to some headsets.

    20. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XP didn't exist in 1999.

    21. Re:Voice recognition by davydagger · · Score: 1

      "A Pentium II 450 Mhz running Dragon Naturally Speaking on XP circa 1999 interprets your voice just as well as Google Voice or Siri (given similar microphones / adc's), the difference has entirely been in the guesses the software makes when it doubts recognition of a word within a phrase. A propagation of high quality mics and adc's into phones versus a crap Labtec mics on 90's era PC's constitutes the rest of the difference." EXACTLY!!! all apple did was package it up nice with wolfram alpha. my motorola razr v3 has voice search too.

    22. Re:Voice recognition by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      Evi dosen't do slashdot. I also didn't dictate that with google's voice-rec. You can tell because the word is misspelled, rather than replaced with the wrong word.

    23. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BINGO!

    24. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even scottish people have problems understanding scottish people.

    25. Re:Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have 6 friends with a 4S and now that's it been a few months i ask them 'how is SIRI?' and all but one respond 'huh? ohh....i don't use that' not because its bad, just because what for.

      The other one responded they turned it off.

  3. Hogwash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google is Skynet. Google is forever. Resistance is futile. I am a Droid Borg.

  4. hmmm by rainmouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can we mark the OP as flamebait?

    1. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to mark samzenpus as flamebait. Since when did he get posting privileges outside of Idle?

    2. Re:hmmm by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple advertising would be closer. The whole idea is completely sill as well, but it makes great advertising for Siri.

    3. Re:hmmm by epine · · Score: 0

      Can we mark the OP as flamebait?

      Slashdot is becoming the new Omni.

      I personally distinguish irrelevant results from results not worth clicking on, which often provide a valuable zeitgeist. I'm most bugged by irrelevant results when a word has two distinct meanings, and I end up with a mixed result set.

      The other problem is search junk. Just this afternoon I was trying to find out whether whey powder supplementation has any scientific validity if you're in it for reasons other than emulating the porn stars who have increasingly become the role models of sexual fulfillment for young men in the modern age of abundance.

      Dear Siri: "Does whey powder supplementation have any scientific validity if you're in it for reasons other than emulating the porn stars who have increasingly become the role models of sexual fulfillment for young men in the modern age of abundance?"

      Even with Google, the gentle reader can imagine I gathered more weeds than seeds. Google Scholar netted me one or two papers that weren't complete junk. Pretty much a dead bust. Thorium fuel cycles are a piece of cake (not without controversy) compared to anything nutritional. The internet is a weird place.

      Siri to the rescue? Not a question one even dares to contemplate unless one's neuro-protective enzymes are raging.

    4. Re:hmmm by geekoid · · Score: 1

      No tit's not. It nothing like Omni, not even in the horrible post Bova phase when it was mostly fringe science.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we mark the OP as flamebait?

      I totally agree. This is trolling to a higher level.

    6. Re:hmmm by macshit · · Score: 1

      To be honest, though, I have a soft spot for any magazine where like 90% of the articles are printed in some kind of weird star-trek typeface on shiny silver paper......

      As unreadable as they try to make it, Wired has nothing on Omni!

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    7. Re:hmmm by rnturn · · Score: 1

      ``Can we mark the OP as flamebait?''

      I vote ``Yes''. I'm a bit tired of people who complain about Google returning `` 30 million hits in 0.013sec''. Nobody cares about anything but the first 2, maybe 3 pages (tops), of hits returned by Google. Google certainly wouldn't do themselves much harm if their responses were more like ``There were 30 links you might be interested. There were also 29,999,970 hits that you probably couldn't care less about. (Click [here] to see those if you've got nothing better to do.)''. (Maybe it's just me but if you're getting that many hits from a search, maybe your search parameters need to be narrower.)

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    8. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I want to mark samzenpus as flamebait. Since when did he get posting privileges outside of Idle?"

      OPTIONS¦EXCLUSIONS¦ select samzenpus checkbox ¦ SAVE

    9. Re:hmmm by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Yes, that would be my vote too.

      As I understand it (someone correct me if I'm wrong):

      1. Google Voice Search came long before Siri, so no, Siri wasn't the first, nor was it the second, or even the third for that matter.
      2. Siri still relies on Google Search for most its results, so it's just a voice recognition component, that all of us with Android phones have had for years.
      3. Google Voice Search is considered better than Siri, at least according to Steve Wozniac (perhaps, he has an axe to grind, I don't know).
      4. Google Voice Search also uses natural language processing, but actually, it goes much farther than that. My Google Voice (my voice mail which basically uses the same technology) actually uses contextual information to transcribe the voice mails I receive. In other words, if you call my Google Voice at different times and from different locations, with the same exact recorded garbbled message, it will transcribe and interpret the message differently. The most noticeable example being that if you call my voice mail on New Years eve and play the same recorded garbbled message, Google's transcript will show that you're wishing me Happy New Years, but if you call me on another day, depending on the day and what other voice mails Google has processed that day from other users -- it will transcribe the message as something completely different.

    10. Re:hmmm by mynamestolen · · Score: 1

      yes and why am I even reading this far down? time for bed!

      --
      work in progress
    11. Re:hmmm by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      Omni reference.. Jesus I feel old!

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
  5. Tautology at its finest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So he's saying that if we perfect assistants to the point where they'll be able to answer our questions directly, we won't have to go look for the answers ourselves?

    No shit, Sherlock.

  6. UIEA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better than a UFIA

  7. Most of the time, Siri just shows Google results. by Kenja · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At least thats been my experience so far.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  8. If you had to wade through 30,000,000 returns... by bluemonq · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...on the sort of basic questions Siri's capable of answering, something went horribly wrong with your query.

  9. "Leverage" is a synomym for "use". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, when there are two words that mean the same thing, you can leverage either of them in a sentence. But just because you can doesn't mean you should. In the future, can we please leverage "use" when we aren't talking about mechanical advantage or something legitimately analogous?

    1. Re:"Leverage" is a synomym for "use". by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      This is the third incorrect syntax flame I've seen in as many minutes. Leverage has a meaning distinct from "use" Use means, well, use. "He used the razor and cut himself." Leverage means "use to your advantage." It has a distinct meaning that the word is unambiguous and clear in that use for that distinct meaning, thus not inappropriate, even if overused as a buzzword, with leveraging synergy and all. You'd never say "He leveraged the razor and cut himself" because that isn't using to his advantage, so they aren't synonyms as you assert. Also, as I think about it, leverage has a lot of subtext. You don't leverage animate objects. You leverage your friends for a new job, but you don't leverage a razor for a close shave. I understand that it's mostly just a peeve of yours, and not a legitimate gripe, but there are enough non-native speakers here, I thought I'd correct your incorrect correction.

    2. Re:"Leverage" is a synomym for "use". by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 3, Funny

      You'd never say "He leveraged the razor and cut himself" because that isn't using to his advantage

      You obviously don't know many Emos.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    3. Re:"Leverage" is a synomym for "use". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try, but sit down before you hurt yourself.

      "Leverage" is a noun meaning "advantage" or "mechanical advantage obtained through the use of a lever". The verb form is "lever," which usually means to "move with or apply a lever," but I suppose it would work in a metaphorical sense, as in "He lowered his shoulder and levered his way through the crowd."

      If you want to complain that incorrect usage of English is confusing and is a disservice to non-native speakers, you should probably use correct English yourself.

    4. Re:"Leverage" is a synomym for "use". by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

      You'd never say "He leveraged the razor and cut himself" because that isn't using to his advantage, so they aren't synonyms as you assert.

      "He leveraged his razor to cut himself more efficiently than he could have done using a spoon." ftw!

    5. Re:"Leverage" is a synomym for "use". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought leverage meant the exertion of force by means of a lever or an object used in the manner of a lever.

  10. Giving them a name was the most important step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we've decided on the name UIEA, the task of actually creating them will be trivial. I've already sold my GOOG stock.

    1. Re:Giving them a name was the most important step by boarder8925 · · Score: 2

      The "task of actually creating them" might become trivial, but pronouncing "UIEA" never will.

    2. Re:Giving them a name was the most important step by boarder8925 · · Score: 1

      The "task of actually creating them" might become trivial, but pronouncing "UIEA" as a word never will.

      Fixed that for myself.

    3. Re:Giving them a name was the most important step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Won't fly until they get an O in there. I mean, really, just 4 out of 5? Their bullshit skills are lacking.

  11. Simple answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a non-story. Next.

    1. Re:Simple answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is important to note that the submitter is a asshat retard as are slashdot editors for allowing the submission.
      Once the asshattedness improves we will no longer have to wade through _irrelevant post results_

    2. Re:Simple answer: no by SoothingMist · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Google's first two pages are usually right on target. The only way to get "... 30,000,000 returns in .0013 milliseconds' of irrelevant search results ..." from Google is to make poor and irrelevant search attribute choices.

    3. Re:Simple answer: no by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Well it's maybe a little bit of a story. The idea that you want answers not webpages isn't a new one. But Google is also investing a ton of money on solving that as well.

      http://mashable.com/2012/02/13/google-knowledge-graph-change-search/

      If you search for something like: "The Eiffel tower height" it'll give you an exact answer now.

    4. Re:Simple answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whenever there is a question mark in the title of a story, ... oh, you know the drill.

  12. Wait a minute by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Forget about leveraging the cloud, AI, all of the wonder of Siri that nobody else has (or some portion of myopic Apple users think nobody else has). Asking Siri something and search by typing a field in a bar are both... search. What looks different is that Siri can take advantage of the semantic web and similar things to read the result to you, and come close to actually understanding what it's doing. But text search can have all of that understanding too.

    Somewhere behind Siri are search engines, and will remain search engines.

    The only thing that's unique about Siri is that the search engine companies can't put their ads in there.

    1. Re:Wait a minute by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only thing that's unique about Siri is that the search engine companies can't put their ads in there.

      Yet.

    2. Re:Wait a minute by genkernel · · Score: 2

      The only thing that's unique about Siri is that the search engine companies can't put their ads in there.

      I can imagine it right now: "Thank you for your question, your answer is sponsered by alienware...avaliable now at your local retailer."

      Just you wait.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
    3. Re:Wait a minute by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only thing that's unique about Siri is that the search engine companies can't put their ads in there.

      Sure they can, by buying a place at the top of the results. Even worse than a traditional ad since you may not even know you are being 'steered' towards a particular product.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is Siri gives you the answer to your question if it can.
      Regular search gives you a list of web pages that may or may not have any relevance.

    5. Re:Wait a minute by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Informative

      Right. As you and the other two have reminded me, this should have been "The search engine companies can't put their ads in there without paying Apple". And you can imagine that any constraints and regulation that are put on Google will make their way to Apple eventually. Will this protect the users? Absolutely not. Nothing can protect Apple users, because the problem is protecting them from themselves.

    6. Re:Wait a minute by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Informative

      The difference is Siri gives you the answer to your question if it can. Regular search gives you a list of web pages that may or may not have any relevance.

      You're not keeping up. Go on google and type "UA 647". You will see the flight status, properly formatted, right at the top. There are a significant number of questions that are answered this way, and it will only increase.

    7. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UA 647

      That's not a question.

      A question is.

      What is the status of flight 647 on United Airways?

      Putting that into google doesn't give me the answer it gives me a list of websites that may or may not be relevant.

    8. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You deserve a million mod points for that retort.

    9. Re:Wait a minute by icebraining · · Score: 1

      "How is the weather in Moscow?" is a question, though.

    10. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's correct but Siri goes a step further. After you ask,

      What is the status of flight 647 on United Airways?

      Siri can use that as the context for you next question.

      What about 544?

      If you put that into google if won't be able to give you a result because it has no context to understand what 544 means.

    11. Re:Wait a minute by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Of course, asking Siri, "What is the status of flight 647 on United Airlines" returns a reply, "I can't help you with flights. Sorry!" followed by a little button that says, "Search the web."

    12. Re:Wait a minute by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It uses thing like Wolfram Alpha, which gives me such useful information as the price of gasoline in Troy Michigan when I ask it to convert troy ounces to regular ounces (troy regular gets me regular octane gasoline in Troy, MI). I'm not impressed.

    13. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But when Siri can help you with flights it will no longer search the web. That's the idea behind siri.

      Siri is 3 key components.

      1. Natural language processing
      2. Context
      3. Backends for information retrieval.

      It is the third that is the currently the most primitive but that will be expanded in the future.

    14. Re:Wait a minute by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      We know that Google already has mature speech-to-text software, it's on every Android device (and lots of other places, I guess). It doesn't seem to me that they would have a problem catching up with the expert system provided by Siri or Wolfram Research.

    15. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We know that Google already has mature speech-to-text software, it's on every Android device (and lots of other places, I guess). It doesn't seem to me that they would have a problem catching up with the expert system provided by Siri or Wolfram Research.

      This has nothing to do with speech-to-text. It has everything to do with natural language processing and keeping a context of the current conversation. Siri would work exactly the same if it was text based.

    16. Re:Wait a minute by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      But when Siri can help you with flights it will no longer search the web. That's the idea behind siri.

      Which means that when its first guess as to what you mean is right, it will be no better than when Google is using its ever-improving semantic features to figure out what you mean and present it first, and when its first guess is wrong, it will be worse than Google.

      So, the question is will Siri's ever-improving semantic processing to find the best result always be better than Google's? Because unless it is, Siri won't be on-balance better than Google.

    17. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google will never be in the lead because the attitude at Google is that, what they have no is no different than what Siri is.

      Take for instance. Google has unit conversion.

      1 inch to meters

      I get a result.

      But if I type

      1" to m

      I get nothing.

      Or if I type

      1 inch converted to meters

      I also get nothing

      Google's philosophy is that the user accommodates to Google. Not Google accommodates the user. That attitude will always leave them catching up.

    18. Re:Wait a minute by Mia'cova · · Score: 1

      Is that actually what it responds with? I don't have siri so I can't verify that. But the query works fine through wolfram.

      http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=What+is+the+status+of+flight+647+on+United+Airways%3F

      My personal expectation would be that the question would be routed to wolfram which would respond with the primary answer: "en route to San Francisco, California (KSFO) from Washington, District of Columbia (KIAD)."

      If it doesn't work, I'd think of this as an edge case as one of their service providers does in fact have the answer.

    19. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How is the weather in Moscow?" is a question, though.

      I just goggled that phrase out of curiosity, and it gave me the weather above the results, ahout 57 degrees. So uh yeh.

    20. Re:Wait a minute by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      So as I ask directions from Siri, it may inform me that there's a 25% sale going on at a store in route of my final destination. So rather than looking at 'shiny', it tells me where and when to look for 'shiny' for me.. Nice!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    21. Re:Wait a minute by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Google will never be in the lead because the attitude at Google is that, what they have no is no different than what Siri is.

      Right. That's why they keep improving what they have in regular search, and why they are working on Assistant.

      Take for instance. Google has unit conversion.

      [snip list of forms that don't work in Google Calculator currently]

      Google's philosophy is that the user accommodates to Google. Not Google accommodates the user.

      You certainly have provided no evidence of such a philosophy. You've provided evidence that what Google currently provides doesn't interpret everything that a human could reasonably interpret as a request to convert inches to meters as such a request. That neither supports the idea that they have a philosophical preference for the user accommodating Google nor supports the idea that they have an attitude that what they currently have available in search is no different than Siri.

    22. Re:Wait a minute by RajivSLK · · Score: 2

      Google does have context. If I type

      "What is the status of flight 647 on United Airways?"

      The search box at the top reads:

      "What is the status of flight 647 on United Airways?"

      I can then change that to "544" by changing three characters or make any other modifications to my query. Google doesn't need to remember to the context on the server side because it provides it in the search box. I don't have to repeat myself like I would with voice.

    23. Re:Wait a minute by Xest · · Score: 1

      Yes, I live in the UK and have a casual interest in Ice Hockey, because the closest thing I have to a team is the Ottawa Senators because that is where my girlfriend is from and I've seen them play when I've been over their once or twice I thought I'd just Google NHL scores to see how they're doing as I heard they reached playoffs. I was quite impressed to see a nice formatted list of scores including logos.

      This is probably not new to many North Americans where the sport is pretty prominent, but to me it illustrated how many things Google is good at giving a context sensitive customised result over as I find I stumble over more and more of them as time goes on.

    24. Re:Wait a minute by benito27uk · · Score: 1

      If you use Google's 'Verbatim' option in the 'More Search Tools' option you don't even need to put quotes in to get the flight status at the top of the response.

    25. Re:Wait a minute by ultranova · · Score: 2

      So as I ask directions from Siri, it may inform me that there's a 25% sale going on at a store in route of my final destination. So rather than looking at 'shiny', it tells me where and when to look for 'shiny' for me.. Nice!

      What happens if the sale is merely near the route? Do the instruction get altered to make me pass as many advertisers as possible? Because "nice" is not the word I'd use for such things.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    26. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It uses thing like Wolfram Alpha, which gives me such useful information as the price of gasoline in Troy Michigan when I ask it to convert troy ounces to regular ounces (troy regular gets me regular octane gasoline in Troy, MI). I'm not impressed.

      Sorry, but trying to convert between troy ounces and normal ounces on Google didn't impress me either. It gives me Troy University as a result.

    27. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google does have context.

      No it doesn't

      What is the status of flight 647 on United Airways?

      Second Question

      Give me directions to its final destination.

      Google has no context for "its".

    28. Re:Wait a minute by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Which makes sense. If you said "troy regular" to me with no context, I wouldn't have a guess at all. That's certainly a better guess than assuming troy ounces.

    29. Re:Wait a minute by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I was being sarcastic, but yes, your comment is justified. In any event, such a detour would be costly in terms of the amount of fuel burned if not a complete waste of my time. But hey, it's Siri. We are all so lazy that we now rely on a machine to make stupid decisions for us. And just when you thought that facepalm would languish sooner than later, it doesn't.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    30. Re:Wait a minute by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      ..well, a lot of search results are basically adverts.

      and uh why doesn't typing it in a search bar have the ability to take advantage of semantic web and whatever bullshit bingo techniques one can throw at it? it's still the same thing!

      the thing with siri is that it's the same as pressing "I'm feeling lucky".

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    31. Re:Wait a minute by jsepeta · · Score: 1

      or, Siri could redirect you to Bing if Apple felt the need to keep their customers off Google.

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    32. Re:Wait a minute by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      "convert troy ounces to regular ounces" got me prices for regular gas in Troy, MI. I didn't put in "troy regular" as a stumping question, I was actually trying.

    33. Re:Wait a minute by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      I have an iPhone 4S and, yes, that's what Siri replies. In fact, it responds that way whether I say "United Airlines" or "United Airways."

  13. I can see the bumper sticker now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    My German Shepherd is smarter than your Siri.

    1. Re:I can see the bumper sticker now... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

      My German Shepherd is smarter than your Siri.

      I was waiting for this one.
      Didn't take long either.
      Now who owns the copyright on it?

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    2. Re:I can see the bumper sticker now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying non-German shepherds are not? Racist!

  14. Technology Prognosticator by tool462 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You mean "bullshit artist" right?

    1. Re:Technology Prognosticator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No! I mean stand-up philosopher!

  15. Supercomputer? by igor.sfiligoi · · Score: 1

    > By leveraging the cloud and supercomputing capabilities, Siri uses...

    And what do you think Google does?
    They have just as much, if not more computing behind them.

    It is just the interface that has really changed.

  16. a search engine that gives results is what I want by k6mfw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't follow much of the esoteric details (and don't give a yayhoo about speed) but when I enter a term in a search engine, i.e. "RF video combiners," I'd like some return of technical documents and (what would be really nice) individual techies with their own webpage showing how to implement and what pitfalls to avoid. Instead I get a bunch of sales/marketing aggregates, tech discussions that are really disguised sales/marketing crap, ebay listings, go-get-bids, sorority-sluts, etc.

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
  17. GIGO? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Burrus is right, we'll no longer have to wade through '30,000,000 returns in .0013 milliseconds' of irrelevant search results.

    Hmm... If that's your experience, then your search query is way off. Learn to ask better questions. Siri won't help if you're an idiot.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:GIGO? by zlives · · Score: 1

      FTFY "technology idiot Daniel Burrus"

  18. Is it just me by gman003 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    or has Google's search gotten crappier lately?

    I was trying to find a purchase or at least pre-order page for a specific laptop model. Top search result on Google was an Amazon link - an Amazon search page for that exact model, showing 0 results followed by the regular "you may also be interested in" links (most of which weren't even tangentially related to what I was looking for).

    That's not all - get this. Google noted that it was recommending this because I had already visited the page

    Really, Google? Really? You track my every move, scour the entire Internet for information, and then you use it to give me a result that is not only wrong, but that you know I've already found (and found useless)? Really?

    I mean, come on, Google. "Turning to the Dark Side" is supposed to at least make you more effective (bad guys always win for at least the first three acts), not make you worse.

    1. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You would think people reading /. would know how to use a search engine. no sympathy here.

    2. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wtf?! Your story reeks of bullshit just like OP

    3. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've noticed it. I think Google knows it to because it also seems the nature of their results keep changing which makes it difficult to craft successful search terms. Part of the problem I think is pagerank. It's so gamed now that relying on it to rank a website relevant because thousands of zombie sites link to it is a bad process.

    4. Re:Is it just me by geekoid · · Score: 1

      It's you.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Is it just me by boarder8925 · · Score: 1

      DuckDuckGo seems to, in general, return better results than Google has for me for awhile now. To me it feels like using Google in the early 2000s, actually, clean and generally bullshit-free.

    6. Re:Is it just me by gman003 · · Score: 1

      My search terms were 'order "asus g55"', as, shockingly, I want to order an Asus-built laptop, model G55.

      The top result, at least for me, is this Amazon page, which has (again, for me, not sure if Amazon does "personalized" searches):
      Four other Asus laptops, including two of last year's G5x models, a similar business-class laptop, and a larger business-class laptop
      Several Asus laptop accessories - bags, car chargers, batteries - none of which is explicitly compatible with the G55
      A VGA Cable marked "for Asus laptops" (bogus marketing, Asus didn't change the pinouts or anything, several regular VGA cables worked with my last laptop)
      A power adapter for Asus home router
      Laptop backpack with "gaming console sleeve"
      Notebook cooler (one of those gimmicky fan pad things)
      USB charger, USB wifi adapter
      Book of guitar tabs

      I have seen that model up for pre-order before. I found several "news" sites that had copied each other, eventually found that the site that actually had them up for pre-order seems to have taken the page down.

    7. Re:Is it just me by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It's not just you. When searching for particular products, I get links to search results pages that don't contain any information (the placeholder marketing pages for unused domains, more often than I'd like). Or Amazon, or a pay-to-bid scam site or one of the comparison sites without useful information.

    8. Re:Is it just me by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      ... and, as I say every time I see someone bring it up, has probably the stupidest name for a search site, ever.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    9. Re:Is it just me by crepe-boy · · Score: 1

      ...apart from Bing.

    10. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      DDG uses Bing as its search backend.

    11. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about better search terms like "asus g55 'shópping cart' OR 'visa'", noob

    12. Re:Is it just me by rsborg · · Score: 1

      ... and, as I say every time I see someone bring it up, has probably the stupidest name for a search site, ever.

      Did you not ever play duck duck goose in grade school? I think the name just rolls off the tongue.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    13. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you shouldn't go to it.

      You should go to Google, Yahoo! or Bing. Those are good, strong, appropriate names that really imply 'search'. Or maybe Hotbot or Altavista. How about Dogpile?

      Idiot.

    14. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse for me. Worth a try, though.

    15. Re:Is it just me by styrotech · · Score: 1

      or has Google's search gotten crappier lately?

      I'm finding the opposite. After quite a few years of increasingly infuriatingly irrelevant and spammy results, things have reversed for me in recent months.

      It's probably all that new fangled privacy invasion they are doing lately, and they fact I normally just stay logged in now and have stopped caring about it.

    16. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're annoyed that Google didn't return results to a page that's been taken down?

    17. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think its less stupid then "Google" or "Yahoo" or "Bing"?

    18. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not just you but your analysis is a little off I think.

        Google Search engine hasn't gotten worse. Actually it keeps getting better and better, the problem is the algorithm are more and more well understood by everyone and so by putting enough money and time and effort you can alter the results very much. Especially on specific keywords like "Asus G55".

        I don't know how much amazon and the amazon vendors spend on google but it must be a lot.

    19. Re:Is it just me by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Yea. If it was "duckgo" it would be different. For some reason the doubling amplifies the stupid.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    20. Re:Is it just me by swb · · Score: 1

      No, we played Duck, Duck, Grey Duck!

    21. Re:Is it just me by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Seems to me this is actually Amazon's fault. That's really all that Amazon had. I'd love to see if they originally had a page that amazon had put up, or if Google actually does just prioritize Amazon's sites over others, regardless of whether Amazon has it or not.

      I'll note that by today (Thursday eve) Amazon has fallen to the #5 result for that particular query (Youtube getting the top results now).

    22. Re:Is it just me by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Even Bing is a better name than Duck Duck Go, as long as you don't make cutie high-pitched "bings!"

  19. Confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This guy seems to have confused Siri with IBM's Watson.

  20. I've Heard Complaints by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've heard complaints that Suri is getting dumber over time. That for some people it used to return the results that they wanted, but now that it is building up its database of what (I'm guessing) a majority of people mean when they ask a question, that at least a minority of users no longer get the results they used to receive for the same query. If Suri gets overwhelmed by queries that can be considered in pop-culture terms to mean something other than their strict meanings, she could quickly become both useless and frustrating.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:I've Heard Complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course she's getting dumber: she's learning from her masters, the Adderall-popping Kardashian-worshipping teeny boppers.

      Siri is a gimmick, and idiots love gimmicks. Did you really expect it to be a valuable tool for the intellectual elite ?

    2. Re:I've Heard Complaints by X0563511 · · Score: 0

      Siri. Then name is Siri. Not Suri. Siri.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:I've Heard Complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Suri gets overwhelmed by queries that can be considered in pop-culture terms to mean something other than their strict meanings, she could quickly become both useless and frustrating.

      Useless and frustrating to you and me, but for the majority of people (ie those that have populated the database), it will be returning exactly what they want.

    4. Re:I've Heard Complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard complaints that Suri is getting dumber over time

      with parents like tom and katie, that shouldn't surprise anyone.

    5. Re:I've Heard Complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like Wikipedia?

    6. Re:I've Heard Complaints by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Of course she's getting dumber: she's learning from her masters, the Adderall-popping Kardashian-worshipping teeny boppers.

      That, or she's learning from her masters, Apple and whomever they partner with to sell various products and services. That's actually Google's biggest problem at the moment.

    7. Re:I've Heard Complaints by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Oh, that's scary. Even scarier than having Jim Carry and Jenny McCarthy as parents.

  21. Siri Simulation by khellendros1984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Siri's really just a slick interface to Google's "I'm feeling lucky" button, with pre-processing done prior to performing an actual search. Google pops up a map if it looks like you're talking about a location; it provides a definition if you ask for one, etc etc. Google already contains a lot of the AI-like characteristics shown by Siri.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:Siri Simulation by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Yea, but it's syntax is wierd.

      I want to tell it to send a text message - i have to first say "send text," wait, then individually fill out the sender and message fields.

      If I try to do something like "send text to jessica" I get a text message of "to jessica" with a blank sender. I've tried several variations on how to construct what I want, and I can't figure out what it wants. Of course, there is zero documentation on this, anywere.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    2. Re:Siri Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, but it's syntax is wierd.

      I want to tell it to send a text message - i have to first say "send text," wait, then individually fill out the sender and message fields.

      If I try to do something like "send text to jessica" I get a text message of "to jessica" with a blank sender. I've tried several variations on how to construct what I want, and I can't figure out what it wants. Of course, there is zero documentation on this, anywere.

      Try "Tell Jessica I'll be right there" or "send a message to Jessica saying how about tomorrow".

      These are (modified) examples from Siri itself. When you start Siri, there is a "What can I help you with?" label with a small info button to the right (a small i in a circle). Press the button to browse through examples.

      Or, try "how do I use Siri" ;)

    3. Re:Siri Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jessica has a smartphone. Jessica can receive e-mails for free on that smartphone.

      Try sending e-mails intead of texts. People will thank you.

      Text messages were obsolete five years ago.

    4. Re:Siri Simulation by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Emails don't work well when you have a bad network connection. SMS messages can ride through. I suggest you learn the differences between the two protocol stacks, and realize how little overhead the SMS has comparatively.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    5. Re:Siri Simulation by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I was talking about Google, not Siri.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  22. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    noob

  23. Obligatory Betteridge's Law Reference... by Almonday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No.

    --
    Posterity, my posterior.
  24. Yeah but? by BradyB · · Score: 4, Informative

    Didn't even Wozniak say that Siri isn't as good as the advertisements?

    Steve quoted on various news sites:

    I have a lower success rate with Siri than I do with the voice built into the Android, and that bothers me. I’ll be saying, over and over again in my car, ‘Call the Lark Creek Steak House,’ and I can’t get it done. Then I pick up my Android, say the same thing, and it’s done. [...] On the 4S I can only do that when Siri can connect over the Internet. But many times it can’t connect. I’ve never had Android come back and say, ‘I can’t connect over the Internet. [...] Plus I get navigation. Android is way ahead on that.

    --

    Good is never enough, when you dream of being great!
    1. Re:Yeah but? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL - so a service provided over the Internet doesn't work without access to the Internet?
      Despite your use of italics I find it difficult to believe that you are accurately quoting Woz.

    2. Re:Yeah but? by TheBogBrushZone · · Score: 1

      Siri is considerably less intelligent outside the USA too. I've never had any problems searching for a local business using Google. After spending 10 minutes trying to over-pronounce the name of someone I was trying to call and being told that a pair of random words do not exist in my list of contacts I wouldn't rate its speech recognition particularly capable when there is road noise in the background compared with Android's equivalent.

      --
      And behold, a command prompt and he who sat upon it, his name was shutdown and -h 3:11 followed with him
    3. Re:Yeah but? by noldrin · · Score: 1

      My limited experience (I have neither) has been that with at least in asking for directions in NYC, Siri keeps giving wrong results, while Google Voice just works. The biggest use I've seen with Siri is getting everyone around you to laugh.

    4. Re:Yeah but? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      LOL - so a service provided over the Internet doesn't work without access to the Internet?

      He was probably referring to Wi-Fi versus 3G/4G access.

  25. What a narrow view of how search is used. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is assuming that there is a single correct answer to whatever search terms you're putting into Google. Troll article is trolling.

    1. Re:What a narrow view of how search is used. by izomiac · · Score: 1

      Exactly. If I'm looking for something using Google, it's quite rare for a single webpage to completely answer my question. It's also intellectually lazy to quit your research after reading a single source.

      IMHO, this comic illustrates this point nicely. (That's assuming a perfect Question -> Answer AI, which probably won't be possible for decades.)

  26. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In which case the problem isn't overthrowing Google, the problem is helping the layperson generate search queries that get what they want.

  27. Most Effective Search by hyades1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    If I want to know something, I just have to ask my ex. She knows everything.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:Most Effective Search by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      If I want to know something, I just have to ask my ex. She knows everything.

      She knew everything?, eh?. Guess that is why she became the ex.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    2. Re:Most Effective Search by hyades1 · · Score: 2

      Yeah...she figured out I was doing all the really dirty stuff with your mom.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    3. Re:Most Effective Search by stevenfuzz · · Score: 5, Funny

      ME: "What time does [movie name] start tonight?"
      Siri GFE: "Not until you clean the dishes."

    4. Re:Most Effective Search by Cute+Fuzzy+Bunny · · Score: 1

      Eh, she married him so she doesn't know everything. Or maybe she knew she'd make him miserable and divorce him and she liked that idea.

  28. I built a UIEA, and it's "Ultra" nothing... by elsurexiste · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Ultra Intelligent Electronic Agent"? What the hell *that* means?

    There's nothing "Ultra Intelligent" in this kind of systems. My team built an equivalent to Siri, but oriented to web tasks. Believe me, there was little intelligence behind it. Most of the work is actually learning and relating tasks to sets of actions (this is grunt work and crowdsourcing produces great results at low cost). The conversation part is a no-brainer. If you provide a context, it's an even stupider agent: I trust it with my users and passwords so it can do boring/repetitive tasks I taught it to perform, and I never have to give him any additional context data unless my password has expired. And surprise surprise, there's no supercomputer involved.

    These agents will never replace Google because they do different things. I wonder what Burrus was smoking when he wrote TFA...

    --
    I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    1. Re:I built a UIEA, and it's "Ultra" nothing... by c0lo · · Score: 1

      "Ultra Intelligent Electronic Agent"? What the hell *that* means?

      There's nothing "Ultra Intelligent" in this kind of systems

      Then... maybe is ultra electronic?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:I built a UIEA, and it's "Ultra" nothing... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      it's a bullshit term some bullshit idiot(author of the article?) is trying to push into tech industry. seen it twice linked from slashdot in two days.

      it's the stuff that would evolve into that virtual secretary for you. but there's this guy who claims to have called it in 2000. too bad the idea is older than verne and even with modern computers done in fictitious manner already in late '80s in the form of asking computer to do things like order flowers etc. the people who are most enthusiastic about them seem to be the kind of people who remind of homer simpsons going "don't worry! the computer will do your thinking now!".

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  29. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Siri, 2+2=4. Provides a result from wolfram alpha. Just tell me 4 on the calc app, no google and no wolfram alpha for all heavens sake.

  30. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by belthize · · Score: 1

    Agreed, somewhat.

    Google has fairly simplistic regex rules to speed the process. I'd happily pay Google $5, $10 or more a month if I could generate a search with complicated regex and weightings. The fee goes to hosting separate servers that specialize in providing truly useful returns in minutes rather than a ream of butt useless ones in a fraction of a second.

  31. Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by antifoidulus · · Score: 2

    Siri is for the most part a front end on wolfram alpha, another search engine....so basically the author is saying that perhaps one search engine is better than another. Unprecedented I know

    1. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wolfram Alpha isn't a search engine.

    2. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use bing, the Decision Engine! Because you can't decide to use something better...

    3. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Its a search engine, the data structures of what it indexes are different than what google indexes, but that doesnt make it anything but a search engine.

    4. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's not. It provides computation engine. When you type

      distance to mars in earth radii

      Into wolfram alpha, it's not searching for the answer. It's computing the answer.

      By contrast a search engine searches for websites based relevant to the words input.

      These are totally different things.

    5. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      It is a search engine. Just because it isn't a web search engine doesn't make it not a search engine.

    6. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Um, you think google is just grepping some big file? They are both parsing(and calculating! what do you think page rank is) big data sets, the only difference is how the datasets they search are structured and how they parse the search. If you want to say wolfram alpha isnt a WEB search engine, then you would be right to a degree, but saying its not a search engine is just plain wrong.

    7. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by hawguy · · Score: 1

      No it's not. It provides computation engine. When you type

      distance to mars in earth radii

      Into wolfram alpha, it's not searching for the answer. It's computing the answer.

      By contrast a search engine searches for websites based relevant to the words input.

      These are totally different things.

      Does that mean Google is not a search engine because when I search Google for 2 + 3 it computes "2 + 3 = 5" without searching for pages that contain "2 + 3"?

      And when I search for San Francisco on Wolfram Alpha, is it computing the population and other data is presents?

    8. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by petman · · Score: 1
      From http://www.wolframalpha.com/faqs.html

      Is Wolfram|Alpha a search engine?

      No. It's a computational knowledge engine: it generates output by doing computations from its own internal knowledge base, instead of searching the web and returning links.

    9. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If they have to explain that they aren't a search engine while searching its own internal knowledge base, then they aren't convincing anyone that they aren't a search engine. Much like saying "I have a Black friend, I can't be racist" does more to prove racism than not.

    10. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by petman · · Score: 1

      Searching an internal knowledge base does not make it a search engine, any more than searching the file index on my hard drive makes Windows Search on my PC a search engine.

    11. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What is the engine that runs Windows Search, if not a search engine?

    12. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that mean Google is not a search engine because when I search Google for 2 + 3 it computes "2 + 3 = 5" without searching for pages that contain "2 + 3"?

      And when I search for San Francisco on Wolfram Alpha, is it computing the population and other data is presents?

      Just because Google can do a limited set of parlor tricks doesn't make it the equivalent of Alpha. Alpha may search to find the initial data but that's not it's primary purpose.

      population of san francisco as a percentage of california's population

      result

      Arguing Alpha is a search engine is like arguing a car is an Air conditioner. A car may have an AC unit but that's air conditioning isn't what it's used for.

    13. Re:Author doesnt even seem to know what Siri is by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      It's a search engine. It's a bit -smarter- maybe, but it's still a search engine.

      The role of search engines has been expanding lately.

  32. No... no no no by stevenfuzz · · Score: 1

    Maybe if we could develop an application that uses ESP. It's one thing if the user is asking questions with a static answer. For example: "How far away is Los Angeles" should technically be one result. But, if we ask anything natural or subjective, then it is impossible to get the quality of results that we can get from browsing the first 10 google results. For example: "How good is the new iPad" should, in theory, get a result from siri like "best technological advancement since the printing press", but obviously the question is subjective to the user and that answer is BS. Otherwise, the best answer it can get us is just going to be a list of appropriate answers, also known as search results.

    1. Re:No... no no no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For example: "How good is the new iPad" should, in theory, get a result from siri like "best technological advancement since the printing press",

      No, that's going to a search engine while using Dragon Naturally Speaking and has been around for 10+ years. This is new. These are ultra intelligent electronic agents.

      When using Siri in its incarnation of UIEA, the answer would be: "I'm pleased to hear you are wondering about the new iPad which is also an Apple product. Since there's no meaningful answer other than for you to try it out yourself, I've just taken the liberty to order you one with express overnight shipping using your MasterCard. The Apple Store agent said Thank You."

  33. That article author by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...apparently does not allow commenting. Once you get one submitted, it's deleted immediately.

    And all I did was call him out for being ignorant.

  34. Re:We get it, Apple is better than everything yeah by stevenfuzz · · Score: 1

    1. why are you a troll? I mean, this entire post was flaimbait in the first place. So either I agree with the post or I am modded as a troll. Lame. 2. I agree +100. 3. Your description of Apple reminds me of "the entity" from south park, and I feel like you are not too far off.

  35. Interface vs Function by LordLucless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Siri will replace Google in the same way keyboards have replaced computers. Siri is an interface to search, not a replacement for it.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    1. Re:Interface vs Function by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Siri is an interface to search, not a replacement for it.

      Yes, but non-technical people often confuse the interface with the mechanism of action, particularly when that interface sits between them and a computing device.

    2. Re:Interface vs Function by Mia'cova · · Score: 1

      Not really true. Siri can search. But siri can also do other things. I can't exactly type "remind me to pick up my paycheque when I get to work on friday" into google. Wolframalpha can also answer some pretty interesting queries that google can't touch. I suspect that with future versions, we'll see more and more useful stuff sneak into siri. Maybe partnerships with more companies, eg comcast: "siri, record tonight's episode of dancing with the stars". It's kinda gimmicky right now but if it works really well for your voice, it can be really nice at times, like when you're driving.

    3. Re:Interface vs Function by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      Siri is a function of the iPhone, Google is merely a web page... the comparable thing to Siri is Evi etc. on Android phones, not a web page...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    4. Re:Interface vs Function by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I suspect that with future versions, we'll see more and more useful stuff sneak into siri.

      I suspect that in the future Google will have something very much like Siri, only available on a much wider array of platforms, and with an open API for providers to plug into.

    5. Re:Interface vs Function by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Siri will replace Google in the same way keyboards have replaced computers. Siri is an interface to search, not a replacement for it.

      Ah, www.google.com is merely an "interface to search" too. Siri is nothing more than a shift in the way users access information. The real war will be who will be running the engine behind those various front ends.

    6. Re:Interface vs Function by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I never said Siri (or voice-command agents, more generally) wouldn't replace Google's home page. I said they wouldn't replace Google (or search engines, more generally). Because the winner in the war to run the search engine back-ends, so far, is Google.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    7. Re:Interface vs Function by ambidextroustech · · Score: 1

      Siri is nice when you're driving down the freeway and you can't be bothered with a keyboard. If anything, Siri could replace keyboards but not search engines.

  36. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google used to return the desired results many years ago, but now they're making vast sums from all these placed ad sites instead of serving quality, they'll only be getting worse. They don't even honor all search terms any more, often serving up utterly useless crap that doesn't even mention key keywords.

  37. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Depends on what you ask. But that's a good point.

    Siri "circumvents" Google search for certain things. "Find me a seafood restaurant" will go to Yelp, which has reviews and such. "How many grams in an ounce" will go to Wolfram-Alpha. Otherwise, it sticks it in a query and ships it off to Google.

    Needless to say, Google isn't sitting still. "Find me a seafood restaurant" in Google will also provide me a list of local restaurants with reviews, much like Yelp does. Arguably, Google's ratings may be better because they are collected from a broad spectrum of sources (user reviews from various review sites, individual bloggers, professional reviews) versus whoever Apple decided to sign a deal with. Speaking of which, you have to consider what kind of deals are being done in the background. Woz recently pointed out something I found a bit disturbing:

    “I used to ask Siri, ‘What are the five biggest lakes in California?’ and it would come back with the answer. Now it just misses. It gives me real estate listings. I used to ask, ‘What are the prime numbers greater than 87?’ and it would answer. Now instead of getting prime numbers, I get listings for prime rib, or prime real estate.”

    So where Siri used to give answers, Siri now gives advertising.

  38. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by belthize · · Score: 1

    Sort of true, I do find myself increasingly annoyed that the terms that are implied to be found increasingly bear no resemblance to the target page but even at its best Google required fairly exact strings. Looking for XXYYZZ234 model number is fine. Looking for more complex strings from stack traces (for bug tracking), formulas or odd context from technical papers has always been clumsy.

  39. Google can find a fucking mosque by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  40. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by icebraining · · Score: 1

    Try the Verbatim option in "More search tools".

  41. Seri cracks me up... by Malenx · · Score: 5, Funny

    A couple of months back my family and I were having a debate whether falling thirty feet would break your legs or kill you, so we asked Siri. She responded back with a list of buildings we could jump off in our area over thirty feet high.

    I'm all for scientific tests... but ouch.

    1. Re:Seri cracks me up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The impact when landing with a military parachute (which is intended to land you in enemy teritory ASAP) is about the same as jumping from 30ft. Don't land on your heels, bend your knees slightly and roll when you hit the ground. (To anybody who wants to try this: never believe an AC on the internet.)

    2. Re:Seri cracks me up... by geekmux · · Score: 2

      A couple of months back my family and I were having a debate whether falling thirty feet would break your legs or kill you, so we asked Siri. She responded back with a list of buildings we could jump off in our area over thirty feet high.

      I'm all for scientific tests... but ouch.

      That's rich. Siri has no issues telling people to go jump off a building, but seems to have issues recommending an abortion clinic...

  42. Siri: Voice I/F for Google's I'm Feeling Lucky by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    Not sure there's much else to say about it, really.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  43. Goodbye Siri and Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wintermute for President 2020!

  44. noise disturbance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well you can always search google in a noisy room. But is the same possible with siri? Well #OldIsGold :)

  45. Cost of Google vs Siri by mstrcat · · Score: 1
    Cost for me to type a google query: minimal, but for the sake of argument, we'll say I bought a new Kindle Fire from Amazon for $200

    Minimum cost for me to ask Siri the same thing: $1900.

    So I'm thinking I can put up with typing my questions into google for the difference.

    So yeah, feel free to laugh at the people yelling at Siri through their iphone.

    1. Re:Cost of Google vs Siri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you also own a smart phone on contract, in which case you're paying about the same amount. Really if you own any kind of phone at all you're paying for it so the cost is $1900 less whatever you paid.

  46. Re:Steered by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Sarcastic/Satirical Futuristic Surrealism ahead:

    "What car should I buy?"
    "You will buy a Ford."
    "Will?! I hate those! You know, Found On Road Dead."
    "No. You WILL buy a Ford."
    "Why?"
    "Because you will be arrested for buying anything else."
    "What does THAT mean?"
    "You are on Main Street, 734 Main or thereabouts within a 100 foot margin, near the Walmart block. Authorities have been alerted that if your credit card shows any other purchase of a motor vehicle other than Ford, you will be deemed a terrorist and treated accordingly. Have a nice day!"

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  47. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Particularly interesting is that Wolfram Alpha still provides correct results for both of those queries -- so Apple may be trying to reduce or eliminate reliance on answers from that site. That would be unfortunate, since it gives much more reliable answers than search engines for questions about a huge range of factual matters (in my experience, at least).

  48. Siri... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Siri, where can I find torrents for movies?

    ...{click}...{click}...
    Hello, this is Chris Dodd's office... Siri tells us that you were looking for movie torrents?

  49. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by nickspoon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Siri must be pretty amazing if it can tell you all the prime numbers greater than 87. Maybe it's smarter than Google after all.

  50. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by grumbel · · Score: 1

    The core problem with search engines right now is that they search just for plain text not entities, so whenever a text string shows up in a webpage that matches, you get that as a result, even so that text string happens to refer to a completely different entity. Some search engines such as DuckduckGo or WolframAlpha do have some support for enties, but they are extremely limited and essentially useless for actual search. So if you type in "Saturn" into DuckduckGo, you get the info that it's a planet, a game console and a few other things, but when you then actually click the planet link DuckduckGo won't do an actual search for the entity, but still just makes a basic text search on the term and of course the first link then goes to Saturn.com, which is a car manufactuer not a planet. For more obscure things it becomes completely useless as it won't even recognize that there is an entity behind the text.

    That the article refers to Siri is a bit misleading here, as the real breakthrough waiting to happen isn't having AI trying to figure out your voiced search query, but instead having AI actually do the parsing and indexing of web content.

  51. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by HenryH123 · · Score: 1

    Very good...

  52. Duh - Depends on the search by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    "What is the weather going to be like tomorrow?" {- good for Siri

    +"trs-80" +"model 1" "model i" -"model II" -"model 2" -"model iii" -"model 3" -color -coco {- Good for Google.

  53. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by X0563511 · · Score: 2

    Quotes are wonderful things. If you knew shit about searching, you would know that you are supposed to put fucking quotes around things you want to do literal matching for.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  54. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have taken classes on Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval, so I feel at least slightly qualified to post about this...

    >ultra intelligent electronic agents

    Really? Just reading this BS name makes me aware that I shouldn't bother to read any further. Siri is easier to confuse than a 3 year old, I wouldn't call it "Ultra Intelligent".

    Then there is the bit about
    > Siri uses natural language search to circumvent the whole Google process".

    Well... yes Siri uses some NPL tricks, but so does Google. They both also use a lot of hard-coded transforms.
    Also, How does Siri "circumvent" the "whole Google process"? You still make a query, and you still get a response. You can do a voice query to Google and hit "I'm feeling lucky" for a single response. The only thing Siri adds to that is trying to fish the answer out of the resulting document. That means a little less work for the requester, but a higher chance of false positives, and means that the types of searches can be done are much, much more limited.

    Siri is tuned to answer certain types of queries in a more automatic way, while (despite the addition of some NLP tricks) Google is still more generic. By definition, therefore, Siri can't replace generic search engines. Try asking it "Tell me the ingredients used in Ito En's Green Tea", and see what it says. They could add an "ingredients" plug-in, but there will always be something else you want to query that they haven't thought of.

  55. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're holding it wrong.

  56. No - UIEA will only work well with known discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you know exactly what you want, a UIEA like siri will find it.

    If you are searching for something unknown to you, a UIEA like siri is far to limited in how you can provide hints and effectively recurse through your searching. The process of discovery for unknown things is, and will always be, better handled by more of a scientific notation, a broader range of results, and a flexible way to identify and note down the path of discovery that can be aligned with the users own natural discovery methods.

    -chris

  57. No by Gumbercules!! · · Score: 1

    No

  58. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by green1 · · Score: 1

    "but" "I" "hate" "having" "to" "put" "quotes" "around" "every" "word" "when" "google" "used" "to" "work" "just" "fine" "without" "them"

  59. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by green1 · · Score: 1

    Worse than that, even in quotes google will still sometimes guess at what you want, or ignore terms. so the only real way to search now is
    +"to" +"use" +"a" +"plus" +"sign" +"and" +"quotes" +"around" +"every" +"term"

  60. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    You're wrong. Most of the time it actually shows Wolfram Alpha results.

  61. Nothing for Google to worry about..... by cooperaaaron · · Score: 1

    And Google will get access to the same tech, if they don't already.... Nothing to see here, move along...

  62. Realize this is from CIO magazine. by Animats · · Score: 2

    Hence phrases like "leveraging the cloud and supercomputing capabilities", and "ultra intelligent electronic agents". If anything, the smarts behind Siri comes from Wolfram Alpha, which is a question-answering system for factual questions. Most of the rest of what Siri does is just vertical search.

  63. I don't get it by initialE · · Score: 1

    Siri is similar to Google? I thought you should be comparing it to Wolfram Alpha.

    --
    Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
  64. Eh... I doubt it. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    I like siri, I use it every day. But I really don't think it compares to Google. I think the reason it might out-perform Google in somme ways is that it has only a finite number of things it can do or look for. Google, put simply, does not.

    Siri is neat but it's not hot shit. Frankly I'm dying for version 2.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  65. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by chebucto · · Score: 1

    Search for "furd focus" and tell me what you get.

    Hint: it's not about furd.

    --
    The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
  66. soon... by Tweezak · · Score: 1

    Google will have at least 5G of data on most of us that Apple can't touch.

  67. We don't need or want natural language searches by FoolishOwl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Years ago, a friend of mine worked for 'Ask Jeeves', which boasted natural language searches. It wasn't doing well in competition with other search engines; the assumption was that their natural language searches didn't work well enough to attract people to use it. My friend told me that, from their internal metrics, they knew that almost none of their users actually even tried to use natural language search terms; they just put in a few key words and hit "Go", just like they do with any other search engine.

    Picking out the key words in a phrase to use for a search is a simple cognitive task that even small children can master, and it's actually easier than composing a complete, natural sentence. Most of a natural sentence is there to provide social context and cues about intentions that are irrelevant noise for a machine -- and often, we'd prefer to do without the extra work of providing that information.

    1. Re:We don't need or want natural language searches by hey_popey · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The less words, the simpler. One of the reasons I am switching to DuckDuckGo: instead of typing 'wikipedia something' (previously with Google in my address bar, I just type '!w something'. I don't see the advantage of going back to a full sentence in natural language...

    2. Re:We don't need or want natural language searches by ambidextroustech · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Keyword searches are far more efficient than full natural language, especially since English is context sensitive as well as ambiguous. I can look up an English word, and there are likely more than one definition attributed to it.

      And wasn't Bing supposed to reduce the clutter of so much information online? I thought it was "Bing and decide?" Why isn't Bing an "ultra-intelligent electronic agent?" Then again, I don't want a search engine to decide for me. And this is where Google still reigns supreme.

      Sometimes, rarely, I will try to find a meta-search engine such as Dogpile because I want to broaden the databases that I am accessing.

  68. Welcome to 2012! by matunos · · Score: 1

    If Burrus is right, we'll no longer have to wade through '30,000,000 returns in .0013 milliseconds' of irrelevant search results.

    Apparently, the OP doesn't know that AltaVista's search engine was shut down.

  69. The real difference is advertising, not keyboard by perpenso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference between Siri and what this author is referencing as "Google" is query entry by voice or query entry by keyboard.

    There is a far more important difference. Google is not getting the opportunity to display the search results, Apple is filtering and doing the presentation, so Google is not getting a chance to display ads.

    This is *critical* because ads are Google's lifeblood. Search, email, social, etc ... they are just vehicles to deliver targeted ads. Google is a targeted advertising company and filters like Siri threaten their core business.

  70. what exactly does siri use as a backend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no clue, I always assumed it was google. What ELSE would they use? altavista mabey?

    To the non-techy Siri seems flashy, until you realize that my motorola razr v3 can also search through my contact list and take other voice commands. This is a p2k os dumb phone....

    voice to text is old news, so are intellegent search engines, of which I think google is the first.

    The non-tech world seems to oh and ah at the pdazzle of the apple marketing machine and great timing, pondering philosophical questions, the techies are scratching their heads wondering why everyone is so amazed. Oh wait, apple finally made said technology FASHIONABLE. They are good at fashion.

    "Siri is for the most part a front end on wolfram alpha"
    again, apple does none of the heavy lifting or any of the dirty work relating towards things like AI, just good at packaging.

    then its going to be ten minuetes before someone else has it because all the hard parts are existing technology that has been around for years uniquely packaged by apple. Granted they are good at packaging it in a way most appealing to the average consumer. Again, not an inovator in technology, but a great at making products for consumers.

  71. "I'm feeling Lucky" by JavaBear · · Score: 1

    You rely on these agents to know what you want, and you miss on all the other search results you might have seen, and which sometimes are far more relevant than the one on top.

  72. wade through results by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    I'll take wading through search results any day over any ultra intelligent electronic agents' supposedly "intelligent" suggestions for me. First, there's nothing "intelligent" in it, they also are search engines, which use some natural language processing to formulate the queries, and then filter the results so you see what its algorithm picks for you. Which I don't always want, in fact most of the time I don't want that. I don't say these agents are not useful sometimes, they can be, but replacing regular searches is a long way off.

    Why do we have to go over similar issues every time some "new" tech comes along and some "smart" chit-chatters start to preach all other related tech's failure, doom and death? It's stupid.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  73. This is not new - remember "ebay severed heads"? by rsborg · · Score: 2

    The problem with google filled with search results (and ads) for google's search, just specific to a major site (ebay, amazon, etc) isn't new [1]. It's not even particularly distressing.

    The problem is more likely due to model proliferation - why are there dozens if not hundreds of models of Asus laptops? Why will you only find a particular model at some stores? The problem is one of retailers protecting themselves from channel conflict (i.e., trying to avoid this scenario: browse store - find item, scan barcode, buy on Amazon, lather, rinse repeat) and manufacturers protecting themselves from actually competing with each other in a commoditized space - when Windows is the standard, why try to be better than the other manufacturer - you simply cut your margins and people buy your hardware, or you don't (i.e., you maintain some quality) and other manufacturers eat your lunch.

    I had this exact problem with this exact manufacturer (a year or so ago I wanted an AMD APU-based laptop with big screen for my dad). I ended up giving up as there was no way I could find the exact model that fit my requirements (E350, 15+" screen, non-sucky reviews). I ended up not buying anything, and a few months later my Dad got a new Macbook Air.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  74. Re:This is not new - remember "ebay severed heads" by rsborg · · Score: 1
    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  75. Google is getting smarter and dumber by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google now knows my IP. It used to be that if you googled "what is my ip" you had to go to a site that was at the top of the search results. Now the Google answers it for you, god knows how, it must be magic!

    Same with conversions, phrase it in natural language and Google answers it for you, rather then forcing you to find a conversion site.

    BUT these things are easy. Answering: gosh like I need to knows the thingy for my thingy so I can do thingy... that is a bit harder. It can tell me what my IP is because it knows what I mean with IP. IF however I was a lame artist and was asking what Intellectual Property belonged to me, I could go very confused by thinking those digits belonged to me.

    What is stockprice X doing is easy. As long as you can regonize "stockprize" and the ticket ID, you got a simple search. But people don't often search like that outside of commercials. Who cares what the stock price is doing. Most people don't have stocks.

    The real problem with search is that A: People often don't know what they are searching for and B: scammers want to get people to visit their website regardless of relevance.

    Take "review". It is a nearly useless term to search for when looking for a review. Most sites that come up don't even have a revue. Then their are the endless link spammers so that if you combine search terms, they just show up because they have links to all the terms but not related. "Linux squeezebox" should NOT find pages that discuss a Linux distro and link to a boombox ad. But they do.

    And SIRI isn't any better at it. Apart from the fact that it often doesn't understand what you are saying, it also can't combine languages. As a dutch person, I am used to use english for the produkt but dutch for "price/prijs" so that I get the product but with dutch sellers. It often works, SIRI can't grasp the concept.

    If search is going to improve, we need a company that is going to brutally cull pages that break searches. All the link farms, GONE. Simply not indexed. Any review site, each review page ONLY carries one keyword, the product reviewed, not indexed for all the other link spam. No review yet available for this product? Then it MUST carry the keyword "NO_REVIEW".

    And that is never going to happen because keywords WERE invented to accomplish this and they just became a spammers tool. Google is a spammers tool and the moment another search engine becomes a worthy SEO target, it too will become a spammers tool.

    The only way to solve it is to let humans review each found site and brutally cull it. A single keyword wrong? A single suspect link? BANNED, the entire domain, for at least a year. Only then might SEO die.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Google is getting smarter and dumber by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      "Linux squeezebox" should NOT find pages that discuss a Linux distro and link to a boombox ad. But they do.

      I just did that search, and it didn't, at least on the first page of results. I suppose if I dug down through all 899,000 results, I'd probably find some that were bad.

    2. Re:Google is getting smarter and dumber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Google now knows my IP."

      Well, Siri doesn't. It always gives me stock quotes for IP (International Paper)

    3. Re:Google is getting smarter and dumber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google now knows my IP. It used to be that if you googled "what is my ip" you had to go to a site that was at the top of the search results. Now the Google answers it for you, god knows how, it must be magic!

      Cut the crap out.
      It's not magic at all. How do you want them to send you the page if you don't give them your IP ?
      Slashdoters are getting more and more stupid...

    4. Re:Google is getting smarter and dumber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay - "stockprize" I could forgive as a silly typo, but the moment I read "their" where it should have been "there" - I had to stop reading because suddenly the intelligence of the poster came into real question.

  76. Siri is actually smart? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, Siri is actually smart?
    Huh, and there was me just getting useless stuff returned.
    Unless of course, you ask it what the answer to life, the universe and everything is.

    Simply put, I consider Siri a toy, nothing more.

  77. Bing sucks pants worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There obviously needs to be more competition in search, I just did the same search on Bing and it's garbage, "uinstall Cisco VPN", followed by pages of useful apps (one called uninstaller, another called insync and thus it thinks the page is about unintalling insync).

    Well maybe Wolfram can bring some new talent to the world of search for Apple and the competition will improve the overall quality of these deep searches.

  78. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "RF video combiners,"

    That could mean not what you think it means. It is a matter of personal context.
    Who asks the question is just as important as what is the question.

    (*cue privacy dilemma)

  79. Godwin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That must be the most disturbing instance of Godwin's law ever...

  80. All I can say is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That the whole idea is very siri indeed*

    *you'll need to have seen Benny Hill to appreciate this :)

  81. Re:a search engine that gives results is what I wa by ignavus · · Score: 1

    Instead I get a bunch of sales/marketing aggregates, tech discussions that are really disguised sales/marketing crap, ebay listings, go-get-bids, sorority-sluts, etc.

    Yeah, it is a shame they keep putting the sorority sluts last. Bummer to have to scroll down all the time.

    --
    I am anarch of all I survey.
  82. I've seen bullshit predictions in my life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But this one ! Oh boy.

      Might Siri perhaps become better than Google search and overthrow it ? maybe yes.

      Would Google stay idle while this happens ? certainly not.

      Is Siri getting its ass kicked by Google Search right now : F*** YES !

      And Finally you can "talk" into Google search too. When siri stops redirecting you to a google search then maybe this "debate" might take place. Right now it's just someone full of shit making a bold prediction and trying to pass for a visionnary in 5 years in the odd chance that overall Apple success might leverage into Siri surpassing Google Search's popularity. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

  83. Re:The real difference is advertising, not keyboar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google still learns about you, and when you're on other websites, the ads displayed there are relevant.

    Search ads are a source of revenue for Google, make no doubt, but website ads are a much bigger source of revenue.

  84. Re:Most of the time, Siri just shows Google result by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

    Actually, the question was

    'What are the prime numbers greater than 87?'

    And the correct answer to that is odd

  85. What about "real" searches? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SIRI (and the Andriod equivalent) might be good for mobile-phone-type questions like "will it rain today" and "is there a coffe place near here" (assuming you have a Mac, you need a coffeeshop to sit and look cool in front of your hipster homies.

    However, if you actually use a computer for actual work, you're going to find problems.

    SIRI, what's wrong with my code when the complier fails with the following error: [breath, followed by 300 lines of compiler output]?
    SIRI, please tell me how to set my hybrid graphics card in my laptop.
    SIRI, is this comment spam: "Hi! Your website is very interesting for me! Nice work!"

    To be honest 90% of searches on my computer are now done with a Firefox keyword (g for Google, a for Amazon, w for Wikipedia, gm for Google Maps). I usually know exactly where I want to search, and a general query goes to a general search engine. Unless it is just a voice proxy ("SIRI, search AllDataSheet for an ATTiny18 datasheet."), I'd rather see a "raw" search than what Apple thinks I mean when their server interpreted my full sentence. I know Google does a lot of selection of results, but for a technical query, the answer is usually in the first page, and if it isn't then I probably didn't give the right query, and SIRI, as a glorified "I'm feeling lucky" button would fail harder.

  86. You can take away my google... by turing_m · · Score: 1

    ... when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  87. Siri Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Siri was very entertaining when it first came out. The novelty was very amusing. But, as time goes by and you start using Siri for real world stuff, you quickly discover that Siri is a useless POS beyond voice control of a select few apps on the iPhone.

    The time wasted waiting on Siri to "think", make some pathetic attempt at self deprecating humor to excuse the inability to find an answer and then ask if you want to be fed Google search results is, well... a waste of time. And, having to correct her misinterpretation of your request takes even longer. Use in a noisy environment like a car at highway speed, forget it.

    I can't type but maybe 20 words a minute.But, my Google foo will kick Siri's ass ANYTIME.

  88. Siri vs Plain Talk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Siri's natural language comes from Dragon, ( same engine ), and its search capabilities are GAMED. ( they are mostly pre-programmed ) which I am sure that they have a staff on working to put together the most 'attractive' candidates. Soon, this will go the way of Plain Talk. Siri has its limits, and those will be glossed over, until 2.0, and a new iPhone. i.e. Siri 1.0 will get progressively worse and worse. )

    Although Google should be concerned about getting ripped off? ( Like Adblock, and noscript are ), in the long run:
    1. Google is hurting themselves with getting GAMED themselves. ( i.e. see if you can find ANYTHING about print cartridge compatibility! )
    2. People need to be trained both to use good terms, and scan the results productively.

    I hope Google gets back into the search engine business, and I have never met a UIEA. I have never even met a IEA. ( but natural language queries, like HAL and Intellect used to process have improved..)

    1. Re:Siri vs Plain Talk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      see if you can find ANYTHING about print cartridge compatibility! )

      Really? Google doesn't give you any search results for this? Or, are you trying to game everyone else into going to your new website.

      When I search, number one one the list Really? PrintOnIt.com - Cartridge Compatibility Chart
      What were you hoping for?

  89. And Watson could replace them all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We just need to build a much bigger version of it, and probably lower power too, but otherwise, yes, Google could very well go the way of the dodo if Watson goes public.

  90. "The Cloud" by tom229 · · Score: 1

    I stopped reading/caring after I read "leveraging the cloud". This article was obviously written by a moron.

    --
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  91. Personalized helps a bit by hey · · Score: 1

    If you say "call my wife" then it might work nicely.
    With a handful of knowledge about you it can seem like a secretary. Your home city, your work and home address, your fav spectator sport, etc.
    Then an agent could warn you about traffic problems in your commute. Push out an alert when somebody scores a touchdown/goal in your fav sport etc.

  92. Bueller? by Fuzi719 · · Score: 1

    How the F does baseless, ignorant crap like this get posted on /.?

  93. Simple answer: No by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    Anyone who would even propose such a thing has obviously never tried to use Siri for anything important.

  94. RegEx by sponse · · Score: 1

    natural language can eat my shorts ! All that I wan't is search the web through regular expresions ! :P

  95. No she isn't... by Iniamyen · · Score: 2

    For 90% of the stuff I ask her to do, she resorts to a google search anyway...

  96. It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "she"? Surely you mean "it".

  97. Author is smarter than them all! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just mention google and siri in any inane blatherings online, and you'll get paid. Next week: Is google's apple pie recipe more scrumptious than siri's? And then a hard hitting expose of google's summer fashions and their controversial similarity to siri's new, fresh looks.

    Bleh!

  98. "leveraging the cloud" by ichthus · · Score: 1

    You lost me at "leveraging the cloud".

    Shut. UP!

    --
    sig: sauer
  99. Re:The real difference is advertising, not keyboar by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Google still learns about you, and when you're on other websites, the ads displayed there are relevant. Search ads are a source of revenue for Google, make no doubt, but website ads are a much bigger source of revenue.

    Mobile ads are considered more valuable than computer ads and mobile is where many expect future growth to be based. Android exists because of this, its an attempt to make sure Google remains relevant as people shift to mobile devices. Things like Siri are a serious threat. It makes Android much more essential to Google's future, assuming of course that Android-based handset providers do not add their own Siri-like functionality that filters search and does its own presentation of results.

  100. Which of this is "Siri" ? by jmerlin · · Score: 1

    From what I've gleaned over reading about and using Siri is that it does nothing more than translate your request into text and find an appropriate service to handle that request. It defers actual "intelligence" to those agents. For instance, it defers to Google and Wolfram Alpha. If you haven't seen what Google and Wolfram Alpha can both do with plain English, you're still living in the last decade. It's incredible. But this is not Siri. So a mediocre STT/TTS app that heavily uses Google is going to cause Google to go the way of the dodo bird? /facepalm. TFA is a joke.

  101. Google UIEA by dgharmon · · Score: 1

    What's stopping Google from writing their own ultra intelligent electronic agents (UIEA)

    --
    AccountKiller
  102. Have they used Google recently? by atticus9 · · Score: 1

    When has Google last served 30 million irrelevant search results? That joke made sense five or six years ago, but modern search engines do a very job of understanding the intent of the search, and Google will often even answer questions directly now ("how tall is president Obama" gets a direct answer for example).

  103. Your joking right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a UIEA to take over the "searching" business, it would have to have a monopolized business plan, which is currently not the case with apple, due to supporting external web databases. Regardless of whether or not Siri uses the Google Search Databases for results, there are going to be more manufacturers with more plans of developing UIEA's off of there databases. So realistically, the most that will happen is Google shuts off it's external use of apple products and makes their own UIEA via Google App on Iphone's. Stating that a powerhouse like Google would let Siri take over search functionality is more of a gesture of "come on google, we're waiting for your version", rather than "uh oh, google is threatened". Give me a break.

  104. but if SIRI gives you only one answer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...can you trust that it's the right one?

  105. Mod parent up! by OneAhead · · Score: 1

    TFA is remarkably devoid of anything insightful or, you know, newsworthy...

  106. You're doing it wrong. by nilbog · · Score: 1

    If you're wading through 30,000,000 results to your search then you're doing it wrong. You should be "wading" through no more than 1 or 2 for 99% of searches.

    --
    or else!