Could IBM's Watson Put Google In Jeopardy? 274
theodp writes "Over at Wired, Vashant Dhar poses a provocative question: What If IBM's Watson Dethroned the King of Search? 'If IBM did search,' Dhar writes, 'Watson would do much better than Google on the tough problems and they could still resort to a simple PageRank-like algorithm as a last resort. Which means there would be no reason for anyone to start their searches on Google. All the search traffic that makes Google seemingly invincible now could begin to shrink over time.' Mixing supercomputers with a scalable architecture of massive amounts of simple processors and storage, Dhar surmises, would provide a formidable combination of a machine that can remember, know, and think. And because the costs of switching from Google search would not be prohibitive for most, the company is much more vulnerable to disruption. 'The only question,' Dhar concludes, 'is whether it [IBM] wants to try and dethrone Google from its perch. That's one answer Watson can't provide.'"
Is this what Wired does now? (Score:4, Informative)
I mean, seriously - "What is someone else made a better search engine? ALL TRAFFIC WOULD GO THERE AND GOOGLE WOULD DIE" just seems so.... speculative.
(Maybe Wired has added a Creative Writing section since I last read it?)
No (Score:2, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines [wikipedia.org]
Re:Better searches no good if they're too slow (Score:5, Informative)
It's also a completely different problem from information retrieval in a messy domain like "all documents on the internet". Watson is built mainly out of more structured data: dictionaries, almanacs, atlases, Wikipedia infoboxes, etc. It turns this into a huge database of knowledge, and then does inference on that database to try to answer Jeopardy-style questions posed in natural language. But this doesn't even try to tackle the other side of the natural language problem, which is parsing not only a natural-language query, but the entire contents of the internet.
In short, Watson might compete in the Wolfram Alpha space, of retrieving structured knowledge from databases, but not, at least not without a major overhaul, in the general document search space.
Re:References? (Score:2, Informative)
You selected celsius at some time.
Open google now, say ok google "What is the current temperature", when it responds click on the F instead of the C. The next time you ask it will use that preference.
Re:References? (Score:2, Informative)
Except there's nothing "better" about Celcius, it's just a different arbitrary standard.
Re:You don't understand Google (Score:5, Informative)
No. It was poor results from other engines. I seriously don't think you remember how bad search results were in the late 90's. It was like a light was switched on and suddenly the best of the Internet was illuminated. Before, AltaVista barely cut it. It was far too easy to game the simple keyword system.