IBM's Project Debater AI Takes on a Human

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by AlphaAtlas, Feb 13, 2019.

  1. AlphaAtlas

    AlphaAtlas [H]ard|Gawd Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,713
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2018
    Yesterday, an IBM "artificial intelligence system" took on human debater Harish Natarajan in a live-streamed debate on the subject of subsidizing preschool. The Project Debater system opened in support of the resolution, and apparently, "she" only had 15 minutes to prepare for the topic beforehand, just like the record-holding human competitor. While Natarajan was technically declared the winner of the debate, IBM's Research Blog notes that 58 percent of the audience thought "Project Debater better enriched their knowledge about the topic at hand, compared to Harish's 20 percent." For those who are interested in the debate bot, IBM is hosting an "experimental cloud-based AI platform for crowdsourcing decision support," which they were undoubtedly hoping to drum up support for with this stunt. Thanks to Jon855 for the tip.

    Check out a replay of the debate here.

    At Intelligence Squared U.S., we've debated AI before - the risks, the rewards, and whether it can change the world - but for the first time, we're debating with AI. In partnership with IBM, Intelligence Squared U.S. is hosting a unique debate between a world-class champion debater and an AI system. IBM Project Debater is the first AI system designed to debate humans on complex topics using a combination of pioneering research developed by IBM researchers, including: data-driven speechwriting and delivery, listening comprehension, and modeling human dilemmas. First debuted in a small closed-door event in June 2018, Project Debater will now face its toughest opponent yet in front of its largest-ever audience, with our own John Donvan in the moderator's seat. The topic will not be revealed to Project Debater and the champion human debater until shortly before the debate begins.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
    dvsman likes this.
  2. filip

    filip [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,856
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    They have a long way to go with this one.
     
  3. DNMock

    DNMock Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    399
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    Sweet, now when skynet goes live and enslaves the human race, our robot overlords will be able to make us feel bad about us not just killing ourselves and forcing poor ole' skynet to waste valuable resources hunting humanity down to finish exterminating us.

    Thanks IBM!
     
  4. SamuelL421

    SamuelL421 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    172
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2016
    I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
     
  5. travisty

    travisty Gawd

    Messages:
    815
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2016
    How so?

    The human never gave a true reason why preschool is not the best option for gvment to invest in. His only argument was to say subsities dont work yet his arguments was to invest/subsidiuze other areas without facts to back him up; which Project Debator shut down in round two. Project Debator used facts to back up their arguments and addressed why preschool is helpful.

    In the end the human talked past the issue - like any good politician - and never addressed the issue itself.

    In short the human fell into a cookie-cutter argument against subsidiesa in general and never against preschool.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
    panhead likes this.
  6. CombatChrisNC

    CombatChrisNC [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,134
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
  7. filip

    filip [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,856
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    A good AI has to be convincing to humans, this one was not.
     
  8. travisty

    travisty Gawd

    Messages:
    815
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2016
    Again how was it not convening? Have facts lost that much value?

    Again don't listen in a partisan way and instead listen to what's being said. The human had nothing to add to the debate besides saying subsidies are bad, m'kay?
     
  9. filip

    filip [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,856
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Facts have lost value in my opinion. The peacock with the biggest feathers wins arguments.
    The facts where great but I do believe that is not the way to convince people.
     
  10. horskh

    horskh Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    134
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2018
    I'm sure the next version of their debater will win. It'll be called Master Debater.
     
    halo000008, filip and Darunion like this.
  11. Darunion

    Darunion 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,759
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Would be more angled toward larger groups though, Mass Debater.
     
  12. modi123

    modi123 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,517
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Ah them were the days.. Get the AI to work in pairs!

     
  13. Galvin

    Galvin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,695
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    I get the impression that IBM is the only one closest to true AI
     
    Jon855 likes this.
  14. Dalexx

    Dalexx Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    160
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Throwing out a bunch of stats alone isn't a slam dunk, and really the AI had the easiest task. Just present a bunch of stats and say *See it's good* I would have liked to have seen the AIs counter argument against the same proposal. I didn't hear the human says "Subsidies are bad" he said that most states funds are limited and there is better ways to spend said funds.

    Personally I think the debate was a bit too short and lacked any real interaction, which would show off how impressive the AI was or wasn't. I understand that is probably how these style of debates go, but for a tech demo, it wasn't nearly as sexy as watching AI beat the best GO and LoL players live.

    *Note I'm not really picking a winner of the debate, I just didn't find the demo of the AI all that impressive
     
  15. clockdogg

    clockdogg Gawd

    Messages:
    926
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    IBM can spend billions on their argument AI, still won't win a single debate with the wife.
     
    Ironchef3500 likes this.
  16. Ultima99

    Ultima99 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,890
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    I was going to say Algorithm 2020.
     
  17. Oldmodder

    Oldmodder Gawd

    Messages:
    707
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    I want to be able to redirect tele marketing calls to that computer.
     
    Ironchef3500 likes this.
  18. DNMock

    DNMock Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    399
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    Facts have very little value in a debate, which is generally about convincing people by playing on their psyche and emotions. For reference, watch basically any political debate ever, or any debate with your wife/girlfriend.

    If facts have a high value it's no longer a debate and we call that a discussion.
     
  19. Thatguybil

    Thatguybil [H]Lite

    Messages:
    96
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2017
    Political debates are separate entity from formal scored debates like this.
    Project Debater won the audience vote but did not win the formal scored debate.

    You can almost say it won the popular vote but lost the electoral college. ;)
     
    DNMock likes this.
  20. Ironchef3500

    Ironchef3500 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006

    they do? Sure sounded pretty impressive
     
  21. ThatITGuy

    ThatITGuy Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    254
    Joined:
    May 5, 2017
    As long as the AI eventually calls the other debater (or relates the opposing argument to) Hitler/Nazis, I am good with their logic.
     
  22. cattix

    cattix n00b

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Totaly upside down logic. Facts are facts, it is what it is, you cant argue that. That is why they are called facts. So you are saying whoever exaggerates the most is right?