IBM’s Watson’s performance in last week’s Jeopardy Challenge was an amazing accomplishment and a demonstration of how our computer systems are becoming more intelligent and capable of solving difficult tasks.

But I wonder if the way that questions were given to the human players and Watson doesn’t give Watson a short, but significant head start. According to the New York Times

“During the sparring matches, Watson received the questions as electronic texts at the same moment they were made visible to the human players;”

Once Watson received a query, it could process it immediately. While the human contestants got to see the query as written text at the same time, Alex Trebek also starts reading the question aloud. When I was watching Jeopardy, I found it almost impossible to read and understand the question more quickly than it was being spoken and suspect that Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter might also. It’s often observed that people find it very difficult to simultaneously process two language streams. While it took Trebek only a second or two to read the short Jeopardy queries, that could have given Watson a significant head start, enabling it to determine that it had a good answer and press its buzzer before the competition.

If this is the case, I am not sure if it is an unfair advantage. People and computers each have native advantages and disadvantages. If Jennings and Rutter got the questions as text without them being simultaneous read aloud, Watson might still have had the advantage of a quicker start.

Other than the burning parliament and resilient protesters in Libya…

A 6.3 magnitude earthquake rocks New Zealand,

U.S. Democratic-leaning states are now fewer in number,

and will we recognize our own planet in 40 years?

It’s hard to know where to start with the uprising in Libya.

Since the Libyan”day of rage” last week (February 17), tensions have dramatically escalated in the North African nation (which shares its eastern border with Egypt).

After 42 years under the regime of Colonel Gaddafi (or Kadaffi, Quadafi, Gaddaffi, Kaddifi, Qaddafi… see our post on that matter here), the Libyan people have grown restless.

Why? Because of (what else?) government corruption, extremely high unemployment (like, 30%), and Libyan oil money that doesn’t find its way to the nation’s people or  infrastructure.

Libya  also has a very young population, and these guys have lost faith in their government. (I mean, democracy would help with that, but Gaddafi isn’t such a fan.)

The mainstream media was slow to embrace this story. The fact that the Libyan government has blacked out channels of communication didn’t help.

When Gaddafi started using mercenaries and the air force to attack demonstrators, the Internet started bursting at the seams with tweets, blog posts, and video of the massacre. (That word is not an overstatement!)

While Egypt and Tunisia’s uprisings brought about regime change, there is reason to be concerned that Libya’s leadership won’t go down so quickly.

Gaddafi’s son, Seif Gaddafi, took to the airwaves (as reported here by The Atlantic) to give an alarming indication of the relentless assault the government will wage against its protesting people:

“We will not lose one inch of this land,” he warned. “We will flight to the last man and woman and bullet.” His father, he said is “leading the battle” and will hold on to power “by any means necessary.” He echoed the same vague, hollow promises made by Egypt’s Mubarak and Tunisia’s Ben Ali, adding, in the dramatic and menacing flair his father has honed for decades, a threat. “We will tomorrow create a new Libya. We can agree on a new national anthem, new flag, new Libya. Or be prepared for civil war.”

Gaddafi is flaunting his continued presence in the nation’s capital, Tripoli, calling news stations reporting that he has fled “dogs.”

Gaddafi in Tripoli. Courtesy of Libyan state TV.

No word yet on what the U.S. will do in response, except that Secretary Clinton has joined in the international conversation condemning Gaddafi and his treatment of the people.

The Washington Post reports that the U.S. must step carefully here, because it does not have the “leverage” of a strong relationship with Libya to influence the outcome.

The situation in Libya is changing by the hour and you can keep up-to-date on the goings-on at Al Jazeera English’s live blog or with the UN Dispatch’s recommended Twitter accounts for reliable news. This great Mother Jones article has helped keep us in the loop on the background of the conflict and is updating regularly as well.

We will keep you informed.