Slashdot Mirror


New Watson-Style AI Called Viv Seeks To Be the First 'Global Brain'

paysonwelch sends this report from Wired on the next generation of consumer AI: Google Now has a huge knowledge graph—you can ask questions like "Where was Abraham Lincoln born?" And it can name the city. You can also say, "What is the population?" of a city and it’ll bring up a chart and answer. But you cannot say, "What is the population of the city where Abraham Lincoln was born?" The system may have the data for both these components, but it has no ability to put them together, either to answer a query or to make a smart suggestion. Like Siri, it can’t do anything that coders haven’t explicitly programmed it to do. Viv breaks through those constraints by generating its own code on the fly, no programmers required. Take a complicated command like "Give me a flight to Dallas with a seat that Shaq could fit in." Viv will parse the sentence and then it will perform its best trick: automatically generating a quick, efficient program to link third-party sources of information together—say, Kayak, SeatGuru, and the NBA media guide—so it can identify available flights with lots of legroom.

19 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ask it "In the case where a woodchuck possessed the ability to throw wood, how much wood, hypothetically, could be thrown?"

    1. Re:How much? by MildlyTangy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ask it "In the case where a woodchuck possessed the ability to throw wood, how much wood, hypothetically, could be thrown?"

      The answer would depend on how much the woodchuck enjoyed chucking wood. If the woodchuck enjoys chucking wood, then the woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood. If the woodchuck does not enjoy chucking wood, then the woodchuck would not chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood. So the amount of wood is somewhere inbetween zero and the maximum amount of wood a woodchuck could chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

    2. Re:How much? by paiute · · Score: 4, Funny

      A European woodchuck or an African woodchuck?

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  2. P vs. NP by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 2

    I've always felt that our meatbrains have a pretty incredible capacity for taking WAGs at NP problems (i.e. traveling salesman). And I feel like an AI would just bring itself to its knees trying to find the 100% best solution to NP questions asked of it, so I wonder if there's some need for a bit of cognitive code that says "is this an NP question? IF yes, go to the WAG process"... Just a thought I had... someone probably already did that.

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
    1. Re:P vs. NP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, once you're willing to give up 100% perfection, NP-complete problems tend to be astonishing easy (computation-wise, developing the algorithms is still hard). Either you can find an acceptable approximation algorithm, or much more importantly, most instances of NP-complete problems are "easy" instances. The worst case for our, say, SAT solvers is still as bad as "exponential time" makes you expect, but that worse case is actually very rare. This observation is why SAT/SMT solvers have gotten a lot better in the past decade or so. Also, the entire discipline of machine learning can be seen as figuring out how to get computers to make WAGs that tend to be right. It's certainly not human-level at many important tasks, but it's improving, and simply adding more data is surprisingly effective at improving machine learning performance (which is why Google Now/Siri/etc. are run by large companies with lots of users and therefore lots of data).

    2. Re:P vs. NP by mysidia · · Score: 2

      Siri, please get me the phone number of the most suitable intelligent virgin female person in the city who would be likely to be willing to go on a date.

  3. This is important by Animats · · Score: 2

    This is an important new thing. We've had question-answering programs working against specific data sets since Bobrow's "Baseball" program of the 1960s. We've had a whole range of question-answering specialist systems running in tandem since Yahoo introduced vertical search around 2005. But cross-topic generality has been elusive.

    If this is real, it's a major development. Is there anything better than the Tired article available?

    1. Re:This is important by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yea, its important ... because they've just realized they need to do multi-part/nested queries.

      Its not really impressive, its a 'no shit sherlock', and I'm blown away that google can't do this already.

      Watson can.

      The important part is that someone just realized they need to do one query, look at the type answer and then use that to generate a new query.

      Well, okay, its not really important or even new ... as I said, Watson can do it and has been able to for years.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  4. Wolfram Alpha... by msauve · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google has some catching up to do.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Wolfram Alpha... by easyTree · · Score: 3, Informative

      Google has some catching up to do.

      Yah...

    2. Re:Wolfram Alpha... by msauve · · Score: 2
      You simply need to click on the "Show details" button. It's the round-cornered rectangle with the words "Show details" in it. This is a common user interface element on many web sites, so learning to recognize such things may come in handy for you in the future. Not that the "(2012 estimate)" doesn't provide a major clue as to when the population was measured. I suppose they could have been clearer, and said "estimate from the year 2012" so you wouldn't get confused whether the population was an actual 3232 or an estimated 2012.

      Abraham Lincoln | place of birth | Hodgenville, Kentucky, United States
      Hodgenville, Kentucky | city population | 3232 people (2012 estimate)

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  5. So misleading. by v(*_*)vvvv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like Siri, it can’t do anything that coders haven’t explicitly programmed it to do. Viv breaks through those constraints by generating its own code on the fly, no programmers required.

    This is so misleading. No program can do anything outside what it is explicitly programmed to do. Viv is programmed to generate code only because it has been explicitly programmed to do so, and can only do so as explicitly laid out in its code. Sure, the code may go an abstraction layer higher, but the constraints these programs can't break through is the same. No one knows how to program general intelligence.

    1. Re:So misleading. by marciot · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure I agree with that statement. If you believe, as I do, that our genetic code is a type of program, than by your argument our own intelligence and free will could be dismissed as being impossible to arise.

      I think your sentiment is better phrased as, "if we manage to program a general intelligence, we will not understand how it works."

  6. Unbiased advice by a corporate-owned AI? by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2

    The article says: "Viv could provide all those services -- in exchange for a cut of the transactions that resulted."

    We seriously need to rethink our economics for a world of abundance and AI and robotics before we get crazier and crazier AIs driven by the profit motive than the out-of-control corporate "AIs" already stomping all over the planet and the people who live there. See also my comment here in 2000:
    http://www.dougengelbart.org/c...
    "And, as the story "Colossus: The Forbin Project" shows, all it takes for a smart computer to run the world is control of a (nuclear) arsenal. And, as the novel "The Great Time Machine Hoax" shows, all it takes for a computer to run an industrial empire and do its own research and development is a checking account and the ability to send letters, such as: "I am prepared to transfer $200,000 dollars to your bank account if you make the following modifications to a computer at this location...". So robot manipulators are not needed for an AI to run the world to its satisfaction -- just a bank account and email. "

    See also the 1950s sci-fi movie "The Invisible Boy" for a malevolent AI that provides just a few key pieces of biased advise that let it almost take over the world. Of course, we already have Fox News... Thank goodness Robby the Robot's emotions save the day in at least the movie...

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re:Unbiased advice by a corporate-owned AI? by MikeMo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You do understand the concept of "fiction", do you not? These movies and stories didn't "show" anything except for the author's creativity and the movie company's ability to smell a winner.

      Honestly, I am so tired of humanity confusing movies with realityl.

  7. Google Now Does Understand Context by Forthan+Red · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... to a limited degree. While you can't ask the Lincoln question in a single statement, you can ask, "Where was Lincoln born?" then when it replies "Hodgenville, KY", you can then say "What is its population?", or "Show it on a map" and it will know from context that the "its" you're referring to, is Lincoln's birthplace.

  8. Jealous of Google and Facebook by penguinoid · · Score: 2

    So they want to make a database of all your preferences and stuff, and use it to make money. Sounds convenient!

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  9. Re:Digital versus Analog by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In Digital, everything either is a "0" (zero) or a "1" (one), which means, everything is either true, or false

    Take 32 of those bits and put them together, now you've got a floating point value that can represent "true" as 1.0, "false" as 0.0, and a few million shades of "maybe" in between those two extremes.

    If that's not analog-y enough for you, make it 64 bits and now you can have trillions of shades. And if that's still not enough, add more bits until you've got the resolution you're looking for.

    I don't see any significant distinction between analog and digital, since digital logic asymptotically approaches analog as you add bits, and with today's memory sizes there are plenty of bits to go around.

    Our meatbrain can cope with a lot of stuffs that the digital computer can't precisely because our brain makes its decision based on imprecise feedback

    Or perhaps because it's running a radically different kind of algorithm that no human has ever understood or implemented on a digital computer.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  10. Re:Amazing by drkim · · Score: 2

    Wow! So...it's like Google?

    Is it like Wolfram Alpha?

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/