Wake Up Call: Could Jeopardy! computer be the next MLB commissioner?

As we head into the third and final day of the big Man vs. Machine competition on Jeopardy!, Watson the IBM supercomputer is kicking serious human tail. With $35,734 in winnings, Watson leads his closest pursuer, former Jeopardy! champ Ken Jennings, by more than $15,000. Brad Rutter is third with $4,800. The three square off again tonight in the final segment (the matches were actually taped last month). This despite the fact that the computer failed miserably with the Final Jeopardy question.

The computer ran up a commanding lead as Double Jeopardy ended and the contestants went into the Final Jeopardy round. All three had to record how much money they’d risk on a final question, relating to “U.S. Cities.”

The Final Jeopardy clue? “Its largest airport is named for a World War II hero; its second largest, for a World War II battle.”

Jennings and Rutter wagered big, and came up with the right response: “What is Chicago?” Watson bombed. All it could manage was a guess: “What is Toronto????” But because the computer’s wager was just $947, it held onto the win.

I was watching on TV along with all of my household appliances, and snickered with an air of superiority when Watson got it wrong. “Stupid computer thinks Toronto is in the U.S.,” I told the microwave, jabbing my finger for emphasis. “What we have here is a glorified search engine. We have a long way to go before computers can actually replicate cognitive human thought.”

Just then I smelled something from the kitchen: the toaster had burnt my toast and ejected it into the sink.

But my point remains valid. Watson may be able to tell us the air-speed velocity of an unladen European swallow, but can it make moral and ethical choices? The computer can make us envious of its fact-finding acumen, but can it make us laugh? If Trebek comes out tomorrow wearing a handlebar mustache and monocle, can we trust Watson to make a witty, derisive comment? I think not.

But that time is coming. Scientists say that in 20 years, computers will be able to do these things. Which brings me to this conclusion: I believe Watson is being groomed not to be the next Supreme Court Justice or Surgeon General, but rather to be our new baseball commissioner. As we know, our current humorless automaton, Bud Selig, has all of a computer’s failings, but few of its strong points. Jim Joyce’s blown call that deprived Armando Galarraga of a perfect game? Watson would have reversed it in the blink of an eye. The steroid scandal? Handled immediately in the 1990′s (Watson hates asterisks).

Watson would employ a salary cap, and head off every MLBPA grievance with its superior knowledge of law. Justice and fair play would rule the land, giving baseball fans confidence that someone competent was actually in charge. Baseball would surpass football as America’s No. 1 sport. Phillies fans would stay out of trouble.

Would Watson make mistakes? Sure. But as we saw on Final Jeopardy on Tuesday, when the computer gets something wrong, at least it has wagered very little. And computers are rarely caught picking their nose.