"By 2006 a single-answer technology other than Google will emerge as the leading answering service and will remain in power for at least two years."

The bet raises an interesting issue, but I think it's slightly askew in a few ways -- some important, and some not so important.

The biggest problem with the logic of the bet is that people don't think in search terms -- period. Most people (although not necessarily most people who use Google, which is a different group) are not merely troubled by boolean phrasing but can't consistently say exactly what they mean. Human-phrased questions won't return the right answer either if you don't ask the right question.

A co-worker of mine used to have a shirt that said WYSINWYGIYDKWYLAITFP, which stood for What You See Is Not What You Get If You Don't Know What You're Looking At In The First Place. (Once upon a time, this was a joke at MS's expense.) The point remains the same: a major problem of tailoring computer systems to end-users (customers) is that users very often aren't sure what they really want, much less how to get it.

In human-to-human communication, this problem is dealt with . . . with some success . . . through feedback, as much as anything else. This is why so many less-techie users prefer search engines that allow progressive searches, where they can first enter a general term (ie, "car") and then do a second search through the results for a more specific term (ie, "sports"), and so on. It's a simpler, more intuitive -- if slower -- way of saying "The results must contain 'car' and should contain 'sports'."

Flowers is dead-on, though, I think, in saying that a superior search service would be able to categorize information more than Google typically does in its current form. For one thing, this would make the search engine even better at filtering out pornography. But beyond that, I think a lot of users would like an option where the results were grouped by type -- for "car", perhaps "automotive", "toys", "railroad", etc, with broad initial categories like "shopping", and so on.

But, ultimately, I think the more important advance will be a system that's capable of more give-and-take with the user, providing and accepting more human-like feedback. I don't really see that happening -- not sufficiently, anyway -- within the next two years. Google is far from perfect, and very poorly tailored to the needs of lower-tech users, but unless, say, a very large, very inexpensive, very proficient Ask Jeeves-sort of service (with outsourced multiligual operators?) comes to prominence quite quickly, I think the bet is a losing proposition.

mjw,

right on. Search is not even the right term. If I ask my friend, what's the name that one Japanese restaurant, what does this mean? Acquaintance, previous conversation, the moment, help us know each other.

For computers to store information, knowledge, data, history, or could we call it memory? Lots has to happen. Computers need to give meaning to information. We're just talking about that know. Though the problem of language is extremely difficult. Creating meaning of an article or even poem is kinda hard. We've known this since at least the work of Saussure. People had insight before; Saussure made it a science.

I use OS X. Spotlight is ok for now. :) What if I say to myself, wow, Vivian sure looked nice during that party. How fast can I find that? If the computer knew who I knew, my calendar, the content of my photos (or even did a simple keyword/date search itself), emails, and who knows. If it could look at all that and make connections. We'd get closer.

To find stuff on our own computers, the computer might need to be complete replica of our own brain. If it knew everything we did...

To find stuff on the web, the computer for sure needs to be a complete replica of our brain. If it knows me, it knows how I think, the meaning behind my speech; it knows of things. And the network out there has deep insight into the world. They'll just talk to each other.

"Search" will be something like that. Who's going to do it? Google certainly is thinking about this. It may take them decades to begin, but I'm sure they're trying. Apple too. Microsoft? They probably have no idea what search should look like.

Google is not likely to be soon displaced. Lots and lots of things need to happen. It'll be collective like any science. Google does have the resources to drive much of it.

To the question, will there be a big improvement in 2 years? there will be some. I'm sure of it. It'll come from some place with lots of resources. It it comes from somewhere besides Google, they'll easily figure it out, take the idea, and make it better.

Apple is driving it too. They want desktop search. Sematic desktop? Yes.

But who knows, psychology is quite primative. Thousands of years and we don't understand ourselves, our mind. And understanding language so we can index and search it? We need to better know how we, ourselves, link signs.

Intelligence and education? Howard Gardiner is one small step towards our future. Lewontin and Gould? If they only had a thousand year lifespan, what they could have done.

Let's say I search for car. What if:

Google knew I've been reading about GTIs. It knows that from email and from site visits. It has indexed the sites and forums I've read. It knows I've owned VWs before. It knows what color I like, where I live, what dealerships I've been to. What if it interpreted all that info. What could it offer? A lot more.

Conveying all that by typing is just too hard. Even if I started fresh and tried to express all that in a few sentences, it's too much pain. Whereever search goes, it needs desktop integration. Speech recognition? OSs like Mac OS XV 15.0 conveying my speech to Google. That'd be a start.

It's going to be desktop and internet companies working together. Maybe Sun will again give it a go. The network is the computer.

Ultimately the problem of answering any question send to a search engine requires software capable of passing the Turing test, which won't happen within the next few years. Ray Kurzweil predicts this to happen around 2020. I would add another 10 years. However, search engine results are somewhat simpler than answers created in natural language. This means that for 80-90% of all questions sent to a search engine, a reasonable set of results could be produced before 2020, but certainly not within the next few years. Google is still leading the market, but there are interesting new competitors such as Endeca.

In the short term, the most successful strategy is to use human reviewers for the most frequently asked questions and implement intelligent pattern matchern algorithms.

I am confused. Should I go ahead and try and challenge this bet since it is now 2008 and 2006 didn't show any Google replacement that has been dominant since then.

So should I go ahead and try to make this bet?

And if that isn't possible then why is it still up?

If WIKIPEDIA can be considered an "Answering Service", then I'd (personally) rule that this bet was pretty good and came mighty close.

I hit WIKI nearly as often as I hit Google, but more significantly, I answer more questions, and obtain far more data on WIKI than Google.

Google is more of a card-catalog, where WIKI is the text.
So in a sense, this prediction was fulfilled (for me) in roughly 2007.

This prediction is not a bullseye, but certainly worthy of a cigar.
Have a cigar, Mr. Flowers.

I can't agree that the emergence of Wikis satisfies this bet. For one thing the "answers" Wiki's provide are subjective and often suspect, and their appearance on any Wiki is dependent on private initiative and incomplete "facts." This can hardly constitute the direct single answer that Flowers is looking for.

As far as Google being replaced by ANYTHING �? that's another bet entirely, and one I will gladly take up. Google is rapidly collecting, disseminating and cataloging ALL the world's information, and they're pretty good at it. Meanwhile they are developing new and interesting ways to cross reference and deliver us that information. So if any company comes up with an "answering machine" that outperforms Google in its current format, it will be Google itself.

Adobe Photoshop
Windows XP
Microsoft Office
Metallic UGG Boots
Mini UGG Boots
ugg boots
Nike SB
Cheap Jordan shoes

شات-العاب-منتدى
بنات-a1-العاب
طبخ-العاب مكياج-العاب
بنات

For people who are ready for outing in the summer, sunglasses are always the must-have accessory.
buy prescription sunglasses from glassesshop.com
all men and women like prescription sunglass
choose discount prescription sunglasses with good service
prescription sport sunglasses can protect you when doing sports
Where to buy prescription sunglasses?
Online prescription sunglasses store.
Best services and quality-prescription sunglasses uk
Online prescription sunglass store
Online designer prescription sunglasses
cheap eyeglasses online
cheap prescription glasses
eyeglass frames
glasses
glasses frame
glasses frames
rimless eyeglass frames
eyeglasses for kids
flexible eyeglasses
metal eyeglasses

oyun
e-okul
otel
driver indir
temel elektronik
sağlıklı yaşam
şiir

hi beautiful blog longbets.org

Media outlets didn't sensationalize the story? In the United States it was on most channels constantly even though there had been less than 20 confirmed deaths or cases, and details were never given whether or not there were other factors involved. This story was as sensationalized as you could get, given the fact that there are more deaths in this country due to our open Southwestern borders on a monthly basis than there was due to he swine flu. And I guess unless you lived on a U.S. border in a border state you would have absolutely no concept of what is actually going on there. And they do quarantine animals in England for over 12 months in order to protect the animal populations there. What a spin. Do you happen to work for the mainstream media?see online :
توبيكات
العاب
يوتيوب
مركز تحميل
المبدعين

sundance II ugg boots nightfall ugg boots ultra short ugg boots classic mini ugg boots
ugg classic tall boots ugg classic short boots ugg classic mini boots ugg ultra tall boots ugg ultra short boots ugg classic cardy boots ugg classic tall metallic ugg sundance II boots ugg nightfall boots
tiffany jewellery tiffany silver tiffany tiffany jewelry
jordan shoes nike shoes wholesale jordan shoes wholesale nike shoes
jordan shoes
basketball shoes

jordan shoes air jordan shoes air jordan cheap jordan shoes jordans shoes cheap jordans, cheap air jordans nike air jordan shoes cheap air jordan shoes buy jordan shoes
nike shoes nike air nike air shoes
jordan shoes cheap jordan shoes cheap nike shoes
jordan shoes michael jordan shoes
classic cardy ugg boots classic tall ugg boots classic short ugg boots ultra tall ugg boots tall metallic ugg boots

thank you very much
شات شات
منتديات منتديات
يوتيوب يوتيوب
d,jd,f d,jd,f
العاب العاب
الطب النبوي الطب النبوي
وصفات طبخ وصفات طبخ
اخر موضة اخر موضة
صور صور
توبيكات توبيكات
توبيكات جديده
توبيك توبيك
توبيكات توبيكات
توبيكات حب توبيكات حب
قصص قصص
صور حب صور حب
صور بنات صور بنات
صور ماسنجر صور ماسنجر

thank you very good
mirc
mirc indir
ilahi
mirc inndir
mirc yükle
mırc
türkçe mirc
mirc download
kameralı mirc
kaçak
kaçak script
kelebek
kelebek indir
kelebek script indir
indir
sohbet
chat
cinsel sohbet
cinsel chat
canlı sohbet
canlı chat
chat sex
cet sex
cetsex
canlı sex
çet sex
chat sohbet
sohbet sitesi
chat sitesi
film indir
divx film indir
divx indir
film izle
dizi izle
mp4 film indir
limewire indir
limewire




hello very good nice galery I congratulate

Christian Louboutin boots
Buy Christian Louboutin boots
Buy cheap Christian Louboutin boots
christian louboutin boots discount
discount christian louboutin boots
cheap christian louboutin boots
christian louboutin boots cheap
christian louboutin boots on sale
christian louboutin wedding boots
Christian Louboutin sandal
Buy Christian Louboutin sandal
Buy cheap Christian Louboutin sandal

Nike SB
Nike Dunk
Nike Dunk SB
Nike Dunk Mid,
Nike Dunk Low,
Dunks for Women,
Nike Dunk High,
Custom Dunks,
Mens Air Force 1,
Womens Air Force 1,

UGG Boots
UGG Amelie sandals
UGG Classic cardy boots
UGG Classic Metallic boots
UGG Classic mini boots
UGG Classic short boots
UGG Classic tall boots
UGG Nightfall boots
UGG Sundance II boots
UGG Ultra Tall boots

Cheap Jordan shoes
Gucci Shoes
Nike Dunk SB
Christian Louboutin
Tiffany Rings,
Bose he