Wednesday, February 16, 2011

TR, 11:15am

22 comments:

KAYLA DELACERDA said...

Watson doesn't have a mind. It has a database and calculations and understands language. Big deal. I don't believe minds can be man made. Yet what a mind is remains unfathomable. I don't believe functionalism would be a good definition of the mind since there is so much more to it than its way of working. Can someone hurt Watson's feelings? No. Can someone hurt Bina 48's feelings? No. She has none. She only has whatever mathematical algorithms were inputed in her. Can a computer experience pleasure? I don't think so. I don't its something humanity should be trying to do for computers either. Computers don't need minds. Humans need to collectively get their's to work together for the better. Its stupid to have Watson compete against people on jeopardy because this machine was made by thirty people. So its basically thirty against two.Yet at the same time Watson could good things for humans; apparently its good with analytics...what ever that means. People need to understand that computers will only have as much power as we give them. They dont even have minds of their own.

Anonymous said...

Its is amazing how technology and all these systems are advancing today. Watson is a creation to which his creators put together or more like their minds were all put together. Watson, when asked questions he wouldn’t answer them as a human would. I think a human would answer those questions more with their knowledge of what they have been thought, through experience, and what they have learned throughout time. Watson was answering these questions differently in his own language and not knowledge but information that has been provided to him. It was very bright of him to actually answer these question and get to a point to beat the other two contestants. Watson is just understanding natural language and answering in natural language. Watson doesn’t hear nor see. They don’t have any feelings therefore it wouldn’t be the same language as a human.

BY CHARLOTTE RUSSELL

Anonymous said...

What Watson is doing isn't "intelligence." He is basically getting his answers like a search engine while the human beings are sacavenging their minds to remember what the answer to the question is. If this method were a true measure of intelligence than teachers would have no problem with students "googling" answers. Learning and remembering are what makes human cognition so mysterious and unique. I am aware that it can be argued that what Watson is doing is a type of learning, a variation of trial and error, but when Ken Jennings or any other person gets an answer wrong and then learns the correct answer they UNDERSTAND their error and why they made it, while Watson will only know that it has to override its current information. It lacks the "why" and questioning feature of thought. For example, if there were a question with an ambiguous answer or could have several answers, the human contestant(s) would immediately challenge the question while Watson will only notice that its answer doesn't match the one on the screen and accept that it is incorrect and not try to fight for an answer it believs to be true.
We all spend a tremendous amount of time wondering if we can replicate human consciousness, but have we ever asked ourselves if we should? Technology has given us a lot of luxuries and made our lives extremely easily. We can pay our bills online, do our grocery shopping and even order our meals via the internet and we should stop there. Our way of life has reached a content medium; we still have the simple pleasures of the past and the gifts of technology and modernity. This is where we should draw the proverbial line and redirect our endeavors to more holistic and beneficial efforts, like creating a stable food source for people in third world countries, not trying to recreate Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey or irobots. We shouldn't get greedy and know where to halt.
My favorite period in history is the Renaissance because during this beautiful epoch people tried to better themselves by mastering as many mediums as possible; artists could play musical instruments, mathematicians could paint and sculpt. Every one was constantly learning and creating new things. The Renaissance gave us DaVinci, MichaelAngelo, Rapheal and many more incredible beings. How will having everything done for us by machines and technology make us better people? Simply put: technology makes us lazy and stupid. I am aware of the magnitude of my generalization, but studies have been conducted that show a significant decrease in attention span in children and teenagers and have shown a greater propensity to be sedentary and vegetate in front of a television screen for hours. I can only imagine when there is a Bina and Watson in every household, it will make thinking obsolete. We don't even calculate arithimetic mentally anymore because we have calculators, just imagine when we no longer have to write our own essays, memorize historical events or even read.
I am not a neo-Luddite, I like being to communicate with friends and relatives who are in other cities and states. I just believe we should be exploring other possibilities of human intelligence and use that for the improvement of the world and not just our egos.

Yeah, Watson can get a higher score in Jeopardy than Ken Jennings, but is Watson going to cure world hunger or bring peace? Having information and knowing how to use it are two completely different entities.

lstelford said...

I am still not entirely conviced in that we can describe what Watson has as knowledge. We as humans understand and are able to comprehend the information that is put foward to us and turn it into knowledge. Watson has been inputted with data and uses that as his knowledge. He has no understanding of what is and what isnt. All Watson knows is the information that has been inputted into him. Watson neither has feelings or opinions. Without these two factors is another reason why I do not call what he has as knowledge. Watson can neither hear or see us.

Anonymous said...

To even be consider as a person, Watson would need more than intelligence, it would need, personality. Watson will answer questions put to it for as long as the power is on. But it will never do anything else. It has no other desires, no motives, and no interests. Its planning skills are limited to game strategy. Its conversational skills are limited to preprogrammed social niceties, which probably don't extend beyond the context of the game. You can make a decent case that it's intelligent – but it's an intelligent machine. You would have to add all of the above, and probably more, in order to get something that you could interact with even online as a person. I perceive functionalism as trying to distinguish brain activity from the thought process. Our working brains are constantly firing neurons and random bits of thoughts this however is not an active thought process because we are not engaged. This difference is a crucial part of how humans enhance their abilities to reason and create complex/abstract thoughts.

Lithica Transparente said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lithica Transparente said...

To be frank, I don't consider what Watson is doing to be actual knowledge, but rather a registering of information as data process. It's similar to how some people set their computers to recognize their fingerprint so it works only for them, or how a computer can "memorize" a password. It may learn through trial and error but that only reminds me of password programs that will work at hacking a security system through trial and error, re-entering data in various ways until something is recognized as "correct".

While Watson is a novelty, and definitely a really amazing project that has obviously succeeded at it's goal, it fails to present the idea that it has an actual mind. It didn't read books, physically experience anything to learn about it, etc. For example: Watson can probably tell you what fire is... and that it hurts when it burns you.. but Watson didn't learn this through experience. Watson learned it from guesswork, analysis of data, and the responses of others. But... how does one define "hurt"? Isn't it a feeling? A sensation? Can Watson identify with what "hurt" is? Can Watson FEEL "hurt"? If not, then there is a very key element of the mind missing from Watson, in which case, Watson does not fully have a mind because Watson cannot identify what "hurt" really is, due to not being able to experience it. If someone kicked Watson, would Watson really feel it, or would Watson just react the way it's heard humans react? What if Watson were taken apart and it's actual FUNCTION of "mind" were no longer possible since it IS a computer and must work as a program... ah but there lies the question... It's a program, so unlike humans, it can be recreated or transferred to another device. Whereas the human mind, cannot be transferred to another device, at least not that we know of.

The line with Watson is blurry because it's a fascinating subject, but overall, once the propaganda and the fodder dies down, what is really left? Hardware that has a program that can recall information, but can't actually experience it. Watson can never play baseball, feel a baseball, even though Watson may understand the parts of it and the concept of it. There are a million other examples of where Watson can fail to have what many consider to be a legitimate mind. For example, part of the mind is also emotion, and identifying emotions. Can Watson love? Can Watson hate? Would Watson even know what these emotions are without having a way to experience it thoroughly?


Sorry for the previous delete, I forgot to add my name

Christine "Nina" Elias
TR 11:15AM class.

Anonymous said...

Watson is very much functional as a computerized mind rather than as a human mind. It may appear that he has deductive abilities but to me it’s just a very complicated set of mechanisms assembled by minds that are far more superior than Watson itself. Having a conscious mind is more that having a very complex set of programs that receive information and automatically give an output. There is something else inside of us that make us inimitable. A computer will never feel pain or happiness; such things can’t be programmed. Our compulsive strive to try to emulate the human mind is dragging us away from our real goals in society. Instead of playing Jeopardy we could be trying to figure out how to solve the earth’s shortage of resources or our need for a new source of energy with the help of technology.
PHI 2010
Estefanny Espitia

Zachary said...

From what I seen about Watson, is that it is a super computer with a lot of memory space. This machine was built for the game “Jeopardy”, big deal, yes this computer learns from its mistakes, unlike a lot of people in the world, but the computer is only as smart as the people made it to be. So I am not really impressed over the computer. A computer will never replace the human mind. The human mind is more powerful than a computer, because we created the computer, and many other things in this world. An example of the human mind being more powerful than a computer is that our mind has the power to create ideas and thoughts. A computer thinks only what is knows, which was given by humans. The human mind has moral reasoning, unlike computers which has no reasoning. The last example is that people has emotions they act on, unlike computers which has no emotion.

Zachary Frischholz

Anonymous said...

I do not think that Watson can be compared to human beings because that is not what it is. It is a computer base that is extremely intelligent built by humans, but still does not have a mind of its own. Humans created it so that Watson can have all the knowledge in the world in various scientific fields; but does Watson have feelings? Can it make a decision based on its emotions or just based on the scientific information humans have given him? Granted, Watson is incredibly impressive for being a sort of database because it has the ability to sort out the wrong answers and come up with the correct answer (most of the time), which is perfect for jeopardy. But as far as using Watson for healthcare, I believe that they will need to spend some more time to prepare him for that kind of field. If not, Watson can just be used for things like jeopardy and we can use humans for the healthcare field, just like it has been in the past. At the end of the day, humans did create Watson so they have the ability to be just as intelligent as he is or even better.

-Victoria Puentes

Stephanie Rosa said...

I think Watson is fantastic and a wonder to watch. In my opinion it seems like Watson has the capabilities for knowledge. Watson holds beliefs because he can doubt and be unsure of his answers or at the same time have convictions. And since belief is necessary for knowledge and Watson holds his answers to be true I believe Watson has some of the necessary conditions for knowledge now all Watson has to learn to do is to come up with the best explanation for the undefeated evidence he has compiled. If he can explain why his answers are true I think they’re might be something there.

Anonymous said...

I think that it was very amazing to watch Watson play and actually get the answers right.At first i thought it was just a old regualr computer that gets answers from the internet.But, Watson is on its own.It has to come up with answers just as the humans do.I think that the way it surveys if it will push the buzzerd is also a great way because its doesnt believe it truly right.I know it doesnt have emotions but a computer would just say what its given.But, Watson takes time as if it really learns from trial and error which, i think is extremely a great mind at work.It even shows how hard its working to find out the data.I also think that watson would be put to use as more than for jeopardy.I think that will one day evolve into helping to world into a smarter world to be honest.Its seems that this computer will be better in time to help because,sorry to say humans are getting more and more lazier everyday.I saythat bcause our children is our future and most of them arent even trying hard to successed for more they just settling for less and if computers like watson have to come in and make decision so be it.I think watson is our future to be honest.

Saine Stevens TR 11:15-12:30

Anonymous said...

What Watson is doing to me is not considered to be knowledge and I don’t believe that Watson really comprehends. Watson is a machine that man created to be a super computer that’s way more advance then the computers we are using now. I don’t believe Watson thinks like we humans do. And when they say that he learns from trial and error what tragedies did Watson come upon that he learns from? What Watson is not knowledge, but a database with a lot of information that searches like a search engine. To me Watson is just a far advanced Google. But one thing I can say is that Watson cannot replace the human mind. Watson cannot be smarter then the mind that created him.

-Saradgy Stgermain

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

I believe that technology is growing exponentially. Each year we see breakthroughs in technology such as Watson. However Watson represents the beginning on an era, the era of artificial intelligence. We may not be able to conceive it logically but in technical means we are getting closer each to reproduce a model of the brain. Algorithms and data simulation are being thoroughly developed and getting more complex each day. Computers are getting faster and that it "may come a moment when they are capable of something comparable to human intelligence", according to Lev Grossman in his article "2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal." This idea is tangible and according to Kurzweil, an expert in this subject states that, "we will succesfully reverse-engineer the human brain by the mid 2020's." But in this type of controversial stipulations we tend to create some type of skepticism, but as a matter of fact it is us humans that are developing new technologies and making artificial intelligence possible in a future. It is product of our dedication and complex systems that requires this breakthroughs. I personally believe however, that there must be a balance. In a future, society will be benefited by improved technologies in all kinds of fields that in consequence will allow for even more development. In the other hand, this will inevitably make humans less competent because they will be reliable and dependent to technology.

Julio Moreno

LYDIA said...

There is so much more to having a mind that being able to answer questions. IBM has created a very sophisticated computer, but I do not think I will ever find myself thinking this computer has a mind, could be my friend, or has feelings. It’s fascinating to have a computer like Watson. I loved how Jeopardy showed Watson’s top three choices and his level of certainty for each answer on the screen. I also loved the idea for smarter automated phone services and performing as a physician's assistance. Technology will always advance but we are beginning to teeter on a world where we may become too dependent. IBM spoke of these new interactive computers as a necessity for the future. We already come to a screeching halt if the computers or internet are down. We need to some how find a balance between technology and humans. In this age of instant gratifications computers are helping us in may ways but also separating us from what we already have, an amazing planet and real human interaction.

Lydia Lane

Anonymous said...

In the discussion of Functionalism, the mind's causal role is defined by its inputs and outputs. In regards to computers and artificial intelligence, the initial problem was getting a a program that functioned well enough to be able to surpass open-question answering. Watson wasn't built just for the IBM challenge but it was still built on the grounds of being able to understand natural language as us humans. Watson will still be unable to do this because like us humans it doesn't have the prior human experience nor cognition that we do. IBM produced Watson to be embarrassingly parallel to reduce changes of making mistakes. I believe that even though Watson is a major scientific breakthrough and is completely successful in its entirety, when it comes to Functionalism, computation and artificial intelligence doesn't seem ethical.

-Christofer Medina

Anonymous said...

Watson is a human made, technological advance in our modern day world. It is currently being compared to human minds which i don't think one can ever compare too. The brain is one of the most incredible organism in the Earth to date. It cause us to react to emotions, perceptions, etc. It also learns when it doesn't know. It has the will to improve. Watson on the other hand does not. It is a computer, operated, designed and taken care of by humans.
Jeopardy is a complex situation to try out the "amazing" Watson against the human mind. But i still don't believe it can be compared because a human mind copes with stress, and other emotions during the decision of picking the correct answer is happening. Watson does not therefore has an advantage.

-walter Navarro

Anonymous said...

Watson is a man made machine. It has no feelings and as everything it knows has been taught to it by humans. He is like the internet, the only difference is that Watson can talk to us and learn from trial and error. I believe his intelligence is artificial, he lacks opinion and personality, it is just a machine with accumulated knowledge. If asked what his favorite color is, what would he respond? If he is asked to remember an event from the pass and discuss his feelings what would he say? Man created the computer, not another computer, so Watson can only be as smart as we want, unlike us humans which don’t have such limitations. I can’t deny the fact that Watson is an incredible machine capable of so much, but I don’t believe it can ever be compared to humans. This machine will never be able to make important decisions on its own. It is a computer and like any other computer can crash at any moment, so I believe comparing it to humans is absurd.

JEFF HUERTAS

Katherin Aguirre said...

Watson is not really a human mind neither like it. It was constructed by humans but I do not believe that it will take over us. Watson was created with a database or so that can make it look for answers, and all this information is there because of its creators. Watson cannot have feelings as humans and it cannot avoid making mistakes as it did in the video neither can it avoid to repeat the same answer as other contestants as it also did in the video because there are parts of our brain that Watson will never have. I also believe that this creation is helping for nothing in the world, it would be more productive if they were seeking for ways to help the Earth that is being consume for ourselves, and they could also use all the money of jeopardy to help people in need.

Anonymous said...

It is really admirable that the man has come this far with technology. But I do not think that Watson thinks for itself. Watson is just a machine with information that responds to key words in order to answer questions. And this machine just makes me think that the man is not far from creating robots for different purposes like in the movie A.I which is exiting but at the same time a bit scary to want to create a robot that besides from being able to mimic a human being to also make those robots feel like human beings. I think about this possibility since it’s obvious that what follows is this step. So I believe that this step in technology advance has its pros but has more cons against us
heydy rejas

Unknown said...

Watson may seem like such an intuitive and wonderful creation, however...it is merely just that, a creation. It has been programed with the knowledge we posses, that we as human beings have acquired. We may say a command or ask a question, but it processes a response to it because thats what it has been designed to do. But can we say this is really operating off true knowledge? If we examine the definition of knowledge we see that it is the condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association. Watson has not gained information or "knowledge" through experience and association..but rather through its programming and set up. We may be able to teach a parrot to speak, but does it know then what it is saying? Can it actually process where the words come from and associate it with experiences or situations? Or is it merely operating off what we have trained it to do? Watson is no different, we have trained it or programed it to do what we want it to do. It will only know as much as we put into it, and for this it does not acquire knowledge sufficiently, rather it expels information we have made available to it ourselves. It will never operate as intricate and outstanding as the human mind does.