Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Overheard on CNN.com: Meet Watson, the 'Jeopardy!' wiz


Comments of the day: “When a machine begins to contemplate its origin, its purpose and its mortality, then and only then will it be intelligent.” – DanoMcRoo “I suppose 90 percent of the human race isn't intelligent by that standard. They are too busy watching Snooki.” – AlphaFour


Jeopardy challenge: Computer versus man


On Monday night, “Jeopardy!” host Alex Trebek directed questions to a new type of contestant: an IBM supercomputer named Watson. Playing against two of the show’s all-time winners, Watson is currently tied for the lead and will play two more rounds Tuesday and Wednesday. Watson has the processing power of 2,800 "powerful” computers and is considered a major advancement in machines' efforts to understand human language.


CNN.com readers were mainly intrigued by Watson, posting interesting, witty comments—and funny exchanges.


KingTriton said, “Watson is going to become SkyNet and build terminators!” Cb704 responded, “Oh, I called that awhile ago. Right now, I'm sitting in a bunker with John Connor and 20,000 rounds of ammo.”


Blesyk said, “Very cool episode! The technology that could potentially arise from this experiment could be astounding. Wonder what would happen if Apple entered the ring?” cranmalreign responded, “Trebek would turn hipster in a black mock turtleneck and try to bilk money out of you.”


jschmurr said, “Forget ‘Jeopardy’ or chess, what's really going to blow your minds is when they build a computer that successfully competes in ‘The Bachelor.’” jschmurr responded, “ANNA23471K, will you accept this rose?"


Of the technology itself, some readers either wondered what the fuss was about while others tried to set doubters straight or shared concerns about technology going too far.


dtboco3 said, “Great, you have a multi-million dollar super computer that is really good at trivia, now what?” And josh101 replied, “The idea of an interface with a computer system that is capable of interpreting human language is something that a lot of people think will be quite remarkable and pave the way for more interactive robots in healthcare, helpdesks, defense, and maybe even education.” dtboco3 said, “My fear is that we become so reliant on computers that if global networks go down, we go down. We are getting close to that point already. All of our power grids and water systems are run by computers. Those networks go down, and aren't restored quickly, society as we know it goes down.”


Born in the USA: Instant citizen?


Linda Kerber, May Brodbeck professor in the liberal arts and professor of history, lecturer in law in the Department of History at the University of Iowa, defended "Birthright citizenship" (and the 14th Amendment), saying chiefly that it “ensures generations of allegiance, equality, stability” and “clearly states that all people born in the United States are citizens.”


CNN.com readers posted their opinions about automatic citizenship.


moloa said, “To me, children born of legal residents are of course automatic Americans. Children born of illegal parents should not be automatic. Let them be citizens of their parent’s country.” But GTSixtySix said, “So the solution to illegal immigrants is to make even more illegals? Only in America.” And chidevil1 said, “Taking away the citizenship rights of children who are born in this country to undocumented aliens will not solve very many of this nations problems. There are a lot more important issues that politicians are neglecting because of their overzealous efforts to blame defenseless undocumented aliens for all of this nations problems.”


Is Charlie Sheen in Denial?


“Two and a Half Men” star Charlie Sheen, who has been undergoing substance abuse rehab treatments at home, said he is currently clean and spoke glibly to the syndicated "The Dan Patrick Show" Monday morning. Of drug use, he said people should stay away from crack cocaine "unless you can manage it socially," which he told a radio interviewer Monday he could.


Readers expressed concern and frustration about Sheen’s irresponsible behavior while others, some former drug addicts, took issue with what he said about using crack socially.


idiocracy82 said, “His justification is truly the sad mark of an addict. No concept of what his actions do to other people.” LookWithin said, “(He’s) in denial and I don't mean the river in Egypt.” FrostyOne said, “Why parents let kids watch this show is beyond my comprehension.” cobwebman48 said, “The producers of the show should fire his butt. This is not the kind of person one would want as a role model for anyone. The show can go away and the producers can come up with one as good or better than ‘Two and a Half Men.’”


BrewGoat said, “Using Crack socially is like trying to bring a Tiger into a day care for show and tell and think everything will be OK.” BobSherunkel said, “The quote ‘unless you can manage it socially’ tells me he still doesn't have a clue how deep he is in the doodoo.” But andylaughs said, “I'm pretty sure that was a joke, comparing "social drinking" to nonexistent "social crack smoking."



Do you feel your views align with these commenters' thoughts? Post a comment below or sound off on video


Compiled by the CNN.com moderation staff. Some comments edited for length or clarity

February 16, 2011
Click to view enricorosan's profile

  it is completely erroneous to assume that a baby of a woman residing illegally  in the U.S becomes automatically an American citizen even if the father or sperm donor is of American descent . If the mother is illegal then every part of her body or issuing from her body or womb is consequently an illegal introduction in the territory of the U.S. For the baby to be considered American the mother must also have an American citizenship.  Also, since the mother can not be granted citizenship because she committed a felony by entering the U.S illegally she must leave the U.S after serving time in jail  with her baby because it would be inhumane to separate them. Since the mother and child are inseparable the baby can't become an American citizen to justify the continuance of its mother to remain in the U.S which further compounds her crime of staying illegally in the U.S.  Mother and its offspring must return to their homeland to live where they both originated. 

February 16, 2011
Click to view Gus082's profile

Oh my friend enricorosan, you don't like the 14th Amendment and the birthright citizenship?  I bet you love the 2nd and all your firearms...

February 16, 2011
Click to view RonFromNM's profile

I don't think anyone should automatically be a citizen of the USA. We can start by deporting everyone w/ an IQ < 100

February 16, 2011
Click to view Religulous's profile

The citizenship status of undocumented immigrants and the U.S. born children of these immigrants is TOTALLY irrelevant compared to the citizenship of non-humans (i.e. corporations). To think that the citizenship of a particular business entity/structure (i.e. piece of paper) has more protection under the Bill of Rights that a good percentage of our country's natural born humans is evidence that or democracy is only an illusion.

February 16, 2011
Click to view mpmovement's profile

Visit the Me Party Movement and discover the most engaging social political network on the web. Check it out at mepartymovement dotcom.

February 16, 2011

It is a false premise.  Unfair to the baby too.  Imagine a baby born on an airplane traveling across the US on the way between two foreign countries.  Then 18 years later the baby gets drafted and does not show up.  Is this fair?  Of course not.  The baby is a citizen of his mother's and father's country.  It is not fair to the baby to impose citizenship on him or her just because he or she was born here.


February 16, 2011
Click to view EshElle's profile

Compare the consequences for the country as a whole of not granting citizenship to those children born in the US.

In the short-term, we might save a bit of money on those we can identify and deport. In the long term, we'll have one, then two then three etc generations of people born and raised in the US. People who are culturally American who are now 2nd class citizens with no education and no rights. This happens in the Middle East all the time. We're better than that! Subsequent generations can't go back to the 'mother country' because the US IS their mother country.

This whole birthright discussion is a diversion from the real issues and leads the country down a dangerous path. Let's talk deficit and jobs ... those are the REAL problems!

February 16, 2011
Click to view JIC81's profile

What's your authority for that proposition, enricorosan?


The Fourteenth Amendment (part of the United States Constitution--the supreme law of the land) tells us that all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.

Born OR naturalized.


Legal provisions, especially constitutional provisions, are rarely written more clearly than that.

February 16, 2011
Click to view JIC81's profile



Citizenship can be renounced.

February 16, 2011
Click to view tbaby2's profile

If the parents are legal citizens-both parents-then yes, child is a citizen.  It's called respect.  If you respect the place and people you are asking to accept you, then get legal.  We have enough issues with taking care of those who are legal citizens.  This way, they have to know the language and the laws and know they are responsible for themselves and their family.  Work in healthcare and it's a problem to even take care of them and having to have their young children to interpret for them.  So no disrespect to anyone wanting a better life, but get legal and stop the looking over your shoulders for the law and have legal rights and services afforded to all citizens in any country-not just here.

February 16, 2011
Click to view JIC81's profile

Unless his or her parents had diplomatic immunity, tbaby2, a person born in the United States IS a legal citizen.


Read the Fourteenth Amendment.

February 16, 2011
Click to view chfp's profile

"Born in the USA: Instant citizen?"


To the holier-than-thou armchair quarterbacks turning their noses up at "illegals":

Unless you're a Native American, your ancestors came to this land and stole it. They were the first and ultimate illegals. After the deed has been done, you act all high & mighty at the next wave of immigrants.  Just remember, throughout America's history, immigrant populations have been discriminated against: Germans, Polish, Italians, Chinese, and so on.  Ironic how the oppressed become the oppressors.  You'd think in this day & age people would be more enlightened, but human ignorance knows know bounds.

February 16, 2011
Click to view ficheye2's profile

There a disconnect happening here. If these folks having kids had a work visa or a history of coming to this country legally their kids should be citizens. But the feel good crowd doesn't want to hurt anyones feelings. Even if they are breaking the law. That's why they are called 'illegals'. I know it's hard to wrap your mind around hard choices, but the founding fathers didn't imagine that thousands of people would want to come here outside of the legal guidelines. These aren't endangered animals. They are humans who know that they are breaking the law and are depending on the soft hearted people in our population to let them stay. Is it OK if I steal your identity? I need it bad. I know it's illegal, but you seem to want to let lots of illegal stuff happen. Puh-leese?

February 16, 2011
Click to view JIC81's profile

ficheye2, the United States did not restrict immigration in any way until 1875.

There was no such thing as an "illegal immigrant" in 1787, when the seven original articles of the Constitution were drafted, nor, for that matter, in 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.


As a matter of fact, Congress was expressly FORBIDDEN from restricting immigration in any way until 1808.


Learn your history before cavalierly ascribing your own beliefs to the Founding Fathers.


In any case, if they didn't intend the children of illegal immigrants to become citizens, they shouldn't have drafted and ratified a constitutional provision that says "ALL PERSONS BORN OR NATURALIZED IN THE UNITED STATES... ARE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES."

That's the language Congress approved and 3/4 of the states ratified.  It's still amenable to change by the same process.


But until then, jus soli is the supreme law of the land.


February 16, 2011
Click to view paladn's profile

A very dark 2 days for Jeopardy.  I turned it off.  I suppose many other people did as well.  Hopefully, Jeopardy has learned its lesson, or better yet, Jeopardy's sponsors have learned their lesson and will return to the regular format.


A definate "NO" vote on this past 2 days.

February 16, 2011
Click to view Dean1960's profile

Does America know that the Area on aging transit system is taking Americans for a Ride???...They are charging the government $12.00 to take one person whom is not in need of any assistance getting on or off the bus 1.5 miles oneway, that is $24.00 for a 3 mile trip....I called a Taxi service and was charged $4.80 for a oneway trip....Now lets be conservative and say that 1 million people ride the Area on aging transit aday and that they only go 3 miles to and from their appointments...That would add up to 24 million dollars aday or around 8 billion a year!!!!!!!!!!!!..Can i get a "WOW"?....So i ask you Mr President; before you take money from our Students and our poor people,Please Take a look at these Inner gov't programs like this one that our taking advantage of our elderly and disabled while the United States is going deeper into Debt, Now i am no Economist, But if i can come up with and expose an 8 billion dollar a year ' Scam ' then you and your administration can do a better job.


You must be logged in to post a comment.

About the iReport Blog

The latest and greatest on CNN iReport, brought to you by Team iReport.

Categories Recent posts Monthly Subscribe