Gary Marcus

@Ylecun Now that you have joined the symbol-manipulating club, I challenge you to read my arxiv article Deep Learning: Critical Appraisal carefully and tell me what I actually say there that you disagree with. It might be a lot less than you think.https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1066418378070507520 …

What I don't quite understand is where your (possibly waning) hostility towards deep learning comes from when we (indeed) don't disagree that much on the way forward, and we (now apparently) agree that deep learning is part of the solution.

My hostility is not to deep learning, it’s to deep learning alone. I have been clear about the distinction for 26 years, and pointed you numerous times to places where I have clarified this, typically in > 140 characters. [repeating inside thread, by request]

Deep learning alone can do a lot of things (in NLP, CV, etc.). tbh it seems you do a lot of pointing to cases where it alone is not sufficient & say "see, Deep Learning won't get us to true AI" when no one was saying that it will in the first place (except non-experts).

Granted, there are exceptions & various levels of hype around Deep Learning (*cough* @deeplearningai_ *cough*), but I think by far the majority of researchers & practitioners see it as a tool for powerful pattern recognition, but don't predict that it alone will get us to AGI.