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."

39 of 366 comments (clear)

  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 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.
    4. 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
    5. 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."
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.

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

      And on Android by default that would be ?: Google

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    10. 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...
    11. 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.
  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 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 ...

    3. 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.

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

    Can we mark the OP as flamebait?

    1. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

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

    This is a non-story. Next.

  7. 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 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 ----
    3. 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.

    4. 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.

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

    You mean "bullshit artist" right?

  9. 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
  10. 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. . . .
  11. 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."
  12. Obligatory Betteridge's Law Reference... by Almonday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No.

    --
    Posterity, my posterior.
  13. 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!
  14. 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 stevenfuzz · · Score: 5, Funny

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

  15. 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
  16. 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.

  17. 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.

  18. 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.