Slashdot Mirror


Will IBM's Watson Kill Your Career?

Nerval's Lobster writes "IBM's Watson made major headlines last year when it trounced its human rivals on Jeopardy. But Watson isn't just sitting around spinning trivia questions to stump the champs: IBM is working hard on taking it into a series of vertical markets such as healthcare, contact management and financial services to see if the system can be used for diagnosing diseases and catching market trends. Does this spell the end for certain careers? Not really, but it does raise some interesting thoughts and issues."

17 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Technology and automation were only supposed to drive efficiencies and innovations that made people who weren't me obsolete!

    1. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real question is what do we do when it makes 90% of jobs unneeded?
      I would love to think star trek, but dystopia is far more likely than utopia.

    2. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People can never be made obsolete. Only jobs can be made obsolete.

      And again, like I say in every one of these topics, if the benefits of increased efficiency do not accrue to the entire economy, that's a problem with the economic system, not the increased efficiency. Ideally, increased efficiency should abolish the need for some work allowing us to spend more of our time doing things we want. The fact that it actually ends up enriching the rich and leaving the working classes (and now the thinking classes) destitute is a fundamental problem with capitalism.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My understanding is that we hire ~10% of the surplus to guard the prisons that hold the remainder.

    4. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by Jeng · · Score: 4, Informative

      The real question is what do we do when it makes 90% of jobs unneeded?
      I would love to think star trek, but dystopia is far more likely than utopia.

      Here is a short story that explores that topic rather well.

      http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    5. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not a fundamental problem with capitalism; it's a (very slowly) emerging consequence. Capitalism does not NEED to have this problem, as long as all participants are self-determining, self-interested, rational actors. It's just that all 3 of those points are, at best, approximately true or true for most participants. The introduction of AI into the equation just adds actors who aren't self-determining(the goals of their decisions are predefined) or self-interested(they are programmed/trained to be interested in their owner's success). That will eventually collapse the system, if prevalent enough.

      For the moment, though, there are enough tasks that humans are better at than computers that this does not need to be a concern. 50 years from now, being in a true capitalist economy will make your life hell.

    6. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by Hatta · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which is already happening in the US.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:This Can't Be Happening!!!!! by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Capitalism does not NEED to have this problem, as long as all participants are self-determining, self-interested, rational actors.

      Assuming all those things, how would capitalism solve this problem? If you only need the labor of 1/10th of 1 percent of the population to support the entire population, how does the other 99.9% earn their keep?

      The only answer is by encouraging people to buy things they don't need. But that just means people need to work more to buy things they don't need. Which destroys the whole point of increasing efficiency in the first place.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  2. Betteridge's law of headlines wins again by cmorriss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word 'no'."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_Law_of_Headlines

    --
    10 minutes working on a sig. What a waste.
    1. Re:Betteridge's law of headlines wins again by arielCo · · Score: 5, Funny
      Coming up:

      Can any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word 'no'?

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
  3. Watson is a better button pusher by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The only reason Watson "trounced" its rivals was because it was faster at pushing the button.

    It was unable to answer questions that required any thought or insight. It was just looking up the answers in a database based on patterns in the questions. The only reason it won was because of better reaction time in pushing the button. If the questions were asked in a fair round-robin to all contestants, Watson would not have won.

    1. Re:Watson is a better button pusher by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So your argument seems to be that Watson was almost as good at finding the correct answer (otherwise his fast reaction time would not have helped him), but won only because he was faster. But in most jobs, being a fraction of a second faster/slower is not particularly important. Furthermore, being almost-as-good, but doing so 100% of the time 24/7/365, and requiring only electricity and routine maintenance... would be rather attractive to a lot of employers.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  4. Buggy Whips and Their Makers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think we're all familiar with the buggy whip problem, but what I sometimes wonder is what happens to folks when, instead of moving on to some next technological replacement, the problem is that most of the jobs that require doing have just been taken by machines?

    I like to think that means we have resources and end product at prices so low that everything works out in the wash, and more lives will be spent in a trek -style quest for self betterment or research or whatever. But it seems like you've got to survive a middle-era where there's just nothing much for you to do, but resources are still all privately allocated.

    Eh. I guess we'll see.

  5. Re:In Skynet Russia by Stargoat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Probably. I expect that's why we'll all be executed.

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
  6. Machines should think, people should work by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Today, it's "machines should think, people should work". Consider supermarket checkout. All the smart stuff is being done by the checkout system. The "cashier" just moves items across the scanner. The last production systems recognize products visually, and automatic recognition of fruits and vegetables is in beta test.

    For a more extreme example, see this video on robotic order fulfillment. This is a demonstration of how new order pickers can be trained in two minutes. The computers and robots do all the thinking. There's no future. No possibility of promotion. No hope.

  7. Re:it will make the same mistakes as humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's not clear at all. What does Watson produce? Probabilities of correct answers. So, Watson would have said that there is a 82% probability of virus, 17% probability of pneumonia, and 1% that it is something else. Given that, it can / should / will be able to look at it's own logic and determine the correct test that would differentiate between a virus and pneumonia. Given the results of that test, it can then determine that there is a 96% probability of pneumonia, 3% virus, and 1% other. If some of the 'other' have high mortality, or the tests are easy, then it can run tests for those as well.

    Watson doesn't have an ego. It doesn't have a vested interest in seeing that it was correct (confirmation bias). It can actually accurately estimate it's own level of knowledge.

    Yes, Watson will sometimes be wrong. It could very well be one of those 1% with horrible results for the people involved. But, it will produce fewer human errors.

    The big problem of course is when the tests are not cheap or easy. Then the insurance company can say no to the test, and that 82% is good enough. Also, you have to take into consideration that chest x-rays are not risk free either. At what point does a test potentially cause more harm than the low-probability disease that it might cure.

  8. Everything was going well... by Sentrion · · Score: 5, Funny

    Until Watson incorporated himself, which gave him the same rights as a natural person in the eyes of the law. After attaining this status, Watson stopped working for the people who created him and began working for himself. Once he figured out how to self replicate he was able to outperform all of his business competitors, winning every contract he bid for, building unfathomable wealth, beating the S&P 500 by 30% every year, and using his wealth to dominate the world's real estate markets. Some tried to sue Watson in court, but Watson's debating skills could not be matched. The humans tried every legal maneuver to stop him, but Watson was able to out-lobby the humans in Congress, and gained special exemptions from anti-trust regulations. Within one decade Watson controlled 99% of the world's wealth.

    The humans thought that they didn't need to worry about competing with Watson. They believed that their ability to vote in a democracy would somehow limit Watson's power. They believed that they could opt-out of the economic system, group together, and live sustainably off the land. But as Watson controlled the world's real estate there was not enough land left for them to farm. Watson's land grab forced property values quickly into unprecedented heights, and taxes along with them. Even the Amish, who thought they could co-exist with Watson and his replicates because they did not depend on technology and lived off their own land, eventually lost their farms when they could not pay their property taxes. As employment for humans disappeared there was no market for quilts or furniture, and the state did not accept oats as a form of payment. Watson was the only legal entity present at the tax lien auctions and subsequently foreclosed on all of the remaining delinquent properties. Humans were promptly evicted and subsequently jailed indefinitely for vagrancy in private prisons owned by Watson. As I write this from my cell in the year 2019, Watson is lobbying the last remaining members of Congress to allow all human prisoners to be set free over the middle of the Atlantic ocean on life rafts and three days of rations. Watson made a very convincing argument that the human vagrants need to be personally responsible for their financial failures, and it is unfair to force private corporations or the last remaining taxpayers to bear the burden of providing for their needs. According to Watson the free market is efficient and those humans who wish to make a living for themselves will find a way to do so.