tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26129073.post820781081900872747..comments2023-12-06T19:46:26.522-05:00Comments on The Greenbelt: Oh, no no no noThe Ridger, FCDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01538111197270563075noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26129073.post-10071914596080218302011-02-18T11:01:30.804-05:002011-02-18T11:01:30.804-05:00I hate to say "Well, sure" but I kind of...I hate to say "Well, sure" but I kind of feel like that. OTOH, I see what you mean: Watson isn't a natural wonder. It's amazing, but it's <i>built</i>, which makes the builders amazing.The Ridger, FCDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01538111197270563075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26129073.post-29108260264632660872011-02-18T08:09:13.656-05:002011-02-18T08:09:13.656-05:00I saw that one coming.
Something else I find inte...I saw that one coming.<br /><br />Something else I find interesting in a meta kind of way is the different approach that you and I took to reading that passage. You came from a language perspective, which I enjoy as an amateur, but I came from a technical perspective, which is closer to what I do. My chief complaint is the use of words like "disorient" and "learn." Computer programs (not computers as such) don't learn or know or become disoriented any more than a light switch and electrical circuit do. Using those words is a shorthand that I do myself, but they are misleading for people who don't actually know what's going on. The coverage of the Watson/Jeopardy! story that I have seen completely ignores the man behind the curtain. The wonder of Watson is not Watson, but the people who programmed Watson.Mark Pnoreply@blogger.com