Artificial Intelligence In Service Of E-commerce Preview of future e-commerce services

[Unregistered 015 0]

I've just read an interesting article about the mentioned topic, and I had to ask Xisto forum users of their opinion and perspective on this.

 

As web is becoming more and more a medium for communication with visitors and less and less "a static page" it also gains a bit of "intelligence". Users now visit web sites and get a bunch of "recommendations", and alike stuff, based on their profile. That is sort of intelligence, namely artificial intelligence.

At some point, when computers evolve and start using retinal scans, there should be no "login pages", and a visitor might be recognized trough his or her eyes. Then artificial intelligence (AI) might "decide" what information to show on page based on that user's profile (pretty much the same way as amazon works today). But in this case, AI is more "intelligent" and you can comunicate with it using your voice instead of mouse (voice recognition). It also could be some animated figure (3D humanoid) that talks to you as you are visiting "the site". The "site" then turns to "shop" or "store" like the one in reality. You might also use 3D hallways and "mall models" through which you could move (like in todays 3D games). The only thing people will have to do then would be to deliver purchased stuff to the customers.

 

So, what do YOU think would the e-commerce future look like?

[Cerebral Stasis 0]

I think it will not be like that.True, it may eventually have voice recognition for the impaired, but keyboards are really the best way to get information across to the computer; typing is fast and accurate, while speech-to-text programs aren't. Computers can already "read" information to a user, but I find the toneless droll to be dull and annoying in most cases; it hardly replaces a human reader.Concerning that little assistant, the 3D web browsers, and such, I don't see the point. There's much more to the internet than information, or that may be the case. Websites have applets, pretty graphics, etc. etc. that couldn't be displayed in a 3D eviroment (not to mention the 3D thing would become confusing, annoying, and slow, since one can now simply type a short address, click a couple links, and have the information one wants at their fingertips). Furthermore, I would consider the "assitant" to be annoying. I know that, when I use programs (MS Word, for example), I always turn off/hide the annoying little assistant that constantly bugs me, even if it is trying to help.The only true use of science-fiction-like AI would be to do our work quicker/for us, and to be a friend (assuming, of course, that we don't look down on them and cause them to revolt, resulting in world-wide extermination of humans due to machines that are all somehow connected in a way that noone can stop [bluetooth] and are bent on making us pay for viewing them as things that we created, even though it would be the truth [i'm sure God can relate]).I don't claim to be able to see the future, or even to have even remotely accurate foresight on what will come with technology, but as far as I can see, things like that, although "cool", are not practical, economically efficient, or necessary.

[ankushbhargava 0]

I thought i should point out the incorrect use of the term 'artificial intelligence' here. Intelligence by definition means 'the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge'. Artificial intelligence refers to a non-living being able to display intelligence. Often techniques like 'data mining' and very smart programs are mistaken for artificial intelligence.You see, when a website like Amazon ® () suggests a user items to buy based on his profile, it is doing that on the basis of data mining programs that recognize rules/patterns in similar data.When a program is able to recognize your voice based on previous recording, it is called a very smart program but does not necessarily qualify to be artificially intelligent.All of the above programs are based of pre defined algorithms. They don't think. They process information and give outputs.Ofcourse artificial intelligence would also have a base of algorithms, but what i'm saying is that such a program would be able to increase the scope of it's processing based on inputs/outputs/and it's environment.Sunny in i-Robot was an artificially intelligent program! It was able to dream even though it was not programmed to.Do i sound any convincing?

[tuddy 0]

In other words AI is computer doing something it was not initially programmed to do. Like programming a robot to say 'Hi' but not 'bye', but it says 'bye' anyway.On the other hand, computers think there smart, be remember they always need someone to program them.

[Unregistered 015 0]

You see, when a website like Amazon Ž (biggrin.gif) suggests a user items to buy based on his profile, it is doing that on the basis of data mining programs that recognize rules/patterns in similar data.

I know very well how Amazon works, and I consider it to have a bit of intelligence in it.

If it wouldn't then people wouldn't be saying things like "How does this site KNOWS what I want?".

If something or someone KNOWS something about something then it might be considered INTELLIGENT. (at least "logically" intelligent, since decisions are made by logic rules in this case)

Acording to "Touring's test" artificial being might be considered intelligent when humans cant distinguish bethween it and a real human.
This is hard to achieve since that artificial being should be humanoid (walk, talk and behave as a real human) but there's been some progress (like A.L.I.C.E. chat robot, but without the body ).

3D thing would become confusing, annoying, and slow

I don't see the point here. I think it might acctually make the process more real and quicker (no typing, but talking, no clicking but asking questions, etc.)

On the other hand, computers think there smart, be remember they always need someone to program them.

And what if it was programmed to program itself?

All of the above programs are based of pre defined algorithms.

Aren't we humans too? I guess by pre-defined one might consider "learned".

[Cerebral Stasis 0]

I don't see the point here. I think it might acctually make the process more real and quicker (no typing, but talking, no clicking but asking questions, etc.)

Do you think it would be quicker to say "computer; open search corridor" which would open up a big 3D hallway that you would then walk down, stopping to open little 3D cabinets and look at little 3D folders with files in them, or to open a web browser, type "https://www.google.de/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=BwkjVKfAD8uH8QfckIGgCQ&gws_rd=ssl;, enter a search quere, click a link, and then view what you want?

Search engines, no matter how verbally acute, will never really be able to search much better than current search engines, since there are a few basic things that make up a search engine, and while the methods can be changed, they really can't be improved upon (how could you make a search for "ice cream" bring up a certain web site any faster using verbal commands and a really smart computer than by using a text search engine such as Google? The only way to narrow the results would be to cross-reference them, but speaking it wouldn't be any faster or more accurate than typing it). Furthermore, it would mean people would no longer have privacy. I like the ability to input information into my computer without everyone in the building knowing what the information is.

Here's a better example; operating systems are currently more or less flat interfaces with icons that lead to different programs/files. Would there really be any advantage to instead having an operating system that appears to be a long hallway with branching doors that one would open to access information instead? It would just mean more processing power, more time, and more information would be necessary to get what would be the same result.

People may make things just because they are "cool", but they won't widely distribute them unless they have some basic use (whether it be fasion, entertainment, etc.). What would be the use of having a 3D world representation of an operating system, save to "look cool"?

[Unregistered 015 0]

Do you think it would be quicker to say "computer; open search corridor" which would open up a big 3D hallway that you would then walk down, stopping to open little 3D cabinets and look at little 3D folders with files in them, or to open a web browser, type "https://www.google.de/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=BwkjVKfAD8uH8QfckIGgCQ&gws_rd=ssl;, enter a search quere, click a link, and then view what you want?

I've never said anything like "files and folders". I've never said anything about saying "computer open search corridor". I think you get different picture from what I was saying. It would be nice if you came to "site" and say "hi" for example, and AI greets you "welcome sir, we have recommendations for you. Would you like to see them?",

You: "no, I am just looking for a bla bla...something..."

AI: "Ok, sir. Here it is. You can search through it. You may view TOC, index, and a sample page. What would it be?"

 

It's something like that. You talk like you would with a normal person. There are no "directories". That's system's concer. You get the service. And the service every (excuse bad word) dumb can use and is familiar with. Isn't that an advantage?

 

it wouldn't be any faster or more accurate than typing it

What do you do faster: typing or talking I can type fast but not as nearly as I can talk

 

Furthermore, it would mean people would no longer have privacy.

I have to agree with this one. (Although people don't have privacy when they go to the mall too).

There might be "text mode" for those who want privacy

You could just say: "Let's switch to typing." AI:"OK".

 

Right now I'm at the point when I like to watch a lot of videos. If there is a video of something I rather go watch it then read about it! People need information fast these days, and reading is slow. It's much better way to learn when someone or something presents information via live presentation or movie.

One can present a 1500 page book in 1-2 hrs of movie, and reading a book takes at least 20 days (if you are real maniac). What is better?