> Watson is more a marketing term than a technical connection between products.
As far as I can tell there's absolutely no connection between the products being labeled as 'Watson' and often times very little machine learning taking place either.
I've interviewed several candidates from IBM over the last ~3 years and almost all of them worked on something with 'Watson' in the name. When we whiteboarded out the architecture of what they worked on it was mostly automation with _maybe_ a touch of machine learning thrown in by a module written by someone else.
Very few of them were able to pass the technical interview.
As far as I can tell there's absolutely no connection between the products being labeled as 'Watson' and often times very little machine learning taking place either.
I've interviewed several candidates from IBM over the last ~3 years and almost all of them worked on something with 'Watson' in the name. When we whiteboarded out the architecture of what they worked on it was mostly automation with _maybe_ a touch of machine learning thrown in by a module written by someone else.
Very few of them were able to pass the technical interview.