
IBM Watson Analytics vs. Microsoft Azure Machine Learning (2014) - rfreytag
http://www.kdnuggets.com/2014/12/ibm-watson-analytics-microsoft-azure-machine-learning-p1.html
======
DyslexicAtheist
Something doesn't feel right about Watson. I had arguments from people who
wanted me to feed motivation (cover) letters from job applicants into Watson
to determine "cultural fit". IMO these technologies are way over-hyped for now
and we are walking down a very dangerous path, because marketing pushes into
this direction and the technology is far from ready.

To prove my point I tried to feed Joseph Mengele, Stalin & Bin Laden writings
into Watson to see how he evaluates the data. As expected Watson had some
"great things" to say about these characters.

Another feeling I get is that when we read info about ourselves in this
context it's like reading a horoscope. People read 2 things that are true (but
vague) and the 3rd thing may not be true but they shrug it off as "oh I didn't
know this about myself yet ... I'll have to monitor myself in future to see if
this is right". We are prone to be "open" to such statements as long as they
sound like a positive trait. But is it true? So in that sense the machine
learning might fool us into thinking we remove bias (but we can not remove
bias like this).

I honestly think that this technology should come with a warning label because
people who have no idea about how the data is being prepared or analysed will
interpret the output verbatim and take it face value.

Here is the link: [http://blog.valbonne-consulting.com/2015/06/13/using-big-
dat...](http://blog.valbonne-consulting.com/2015/06/13/using-big-data-to-
analyse-your-personality-and-character/)

~~~
rfreytag
Yes, as we become removed from the reasoning, let alone the information behind
a recommendation, also removed is the opportunity for critical review of
recommendations. Your horoscope comparison is apt. Just look at the concerns
about self-delusion and data shopping being raised in peer-reviewed science:
(text): [http://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9216383/irreproducibility-
resea...](http://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9216383/irreproducibility-research)
(audio):
[http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/01/15/463237871/episo...](http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/01/15/463237871/episode-677-the-
experiment-experiment)

Clearly, there will need to be better automation, wide understanding, and
improvements of techniques for producing more reliable results with machine
learning. For example, the common standard of 2 sigmas for publishable resuls
ought to be increased to 3 sigmas at least. I'm not suggesting the 6 sigmas
used at the LHC but 2 (1:20) seems insufficient.

------
nl
Watson _Analytics_ is basically a cloud hosted version of IBM Cognos with a
pretty interface and some natural language parsing.

The _Watson_ brandname encompass IBM's Machine Learning and "Big Data"
offerings. It doesn't really have a huge amount to do with Watson-the-Jeopardy
winner apart from the name.

~~~
coalesce
This is completely incorrect. Watson Analytics is a dumbed down version SPSS
with a web interface.

~~~
nl
Is it?

I've been to Cognos presentations where they show the same functionality in
both Watson Analytics and Cognos. Maybe they have merged some SPSS
functionality as well?

