I've sub-titled this, "Hey Watson, sit-up, roll-over, beg, play-dead...now speak!" As I am prone to do from time-to-time, this article is more 'editorial' than 'reporting.' (So I am telling you that right up front.)
The theme of Scaling New Heights 2018, 'Tame the Machines' was based around the future of the accounting profession (and related professions such as bookkeepers and ProAdvisors) in light of emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Natural Language interfaces, and other similar advancements. One of the promised, and delivered, presentations was from IBM who gave a demonstration of their 'super-super-super' computer Watson, named for IBM's founder.
I say promised and delivered because IBM did in fact appear, and they brought with them a 'live connection' to Watson. It just happens that the live connection was a baby-blue dinosaur from 'Cogni Toys' that had a bluetooth link to a cell phone with a VPN-connection to Watson.
There was very limited interaction with 'the toy' during the demonstration and it was almost impossible to really hear the 'childlike' voice that responded to simplistic questions. The 'cogni toy' is available commercially and is designed to be an interactive teaching device for children in the 6 to 9 age group. Because it is designed for that age of learner, Watson responds with answers geared toward that age of learner.
Will the real 'Watson' please stand up?
Will_the_real_Watson_stand-up
While IBM's representatives showed a video of Watson beating two Jeopardy champions several years ago, and also from a Cancer Specialist at Sloan-Kettering Hospital telling the audience about how Watson has repeatedly helped them confirm cancer treatment plans, the examples led one to wonder if 'Watson was moving backward' from past successes when forced to assume the 'simplistic' role of a dinosaur toy.
Their emphasis during the presentation wasn't so much on on the capabilities of Watson to provide answers professionals didn't know, as much as it was Watson's ability to help professionals ask better questions. So, while 'the Moon is really far away' is one correct answer when you ask the little dinosaur (Watson) "how far away is the moon", rather than "how many miles away is the moon" (which of course is the 'better question' Watson was trying to get the inquirer to ask), I would have expected a super-super-computer to hopefully have the ability to be a little more 'human aware' and able to interpret the true nature of the intended query.
Back in September of 2016 I was fortunate enough to have a 45 minute sit-down interview with Michio Kaku, PhD, the distinguished theoretical physicist, futurist and popularizer of science through TV specials on the Discovery Channel, History Channel and Science Channel. At that time I asked him about the the future of super computers like Watson since he has had extensive work with IBM in the area of Artificial Intelligence. He told me, " Watson has no people-to-people skills, no common sense and no pattern recognition abilities. This makes Watson's overall intelligence level only slight greater than a bug..."
I guess, in the roughly 20-months since my interview with Dr. Kaku, Watson the super learning machine computer has gone from 'bug' to 'toy.'
All joking aside, while Watson and 'Watson-powered' applications like the Tax Return application used by H&R Block may enable tax preparers to do a better job of getting the numbers right when it comes to your 1040, even H&R Block recognized that Watson was just a tool for use by their Tax Professionals who must still rely upon their own 'human expertise, knowledge and judgement' when working with Watson on behalf of taxpayers.
Later in the same day a joke began circulating around the conference. Someone asked the Watson powered dinosaur-toy a question and Watson responded, "Ask Murph!" All I can say to that is......perhaps Watson is pretty smart after all.
Personally, I see the expansion of machine intelligence, along with voice and natural language recognition and understanding hugely important in the progress of our profession, but I find it far less threatening than some would have us believe.
We are a long way from Watson, or any other 'thinking machine' taking over our profession, these are still tools we can and should master. As I see it, the feared 'terminator timeline' of a world controlled by computer-masters and robot-machines is nowhere in sight so long as 'we' remember that 'we' are in charge of our destiny, not 'Watson.'