astonished that anyone knowledgeable could claim that neural nets are (obviously) an “abstraction of neural processing” when we don’t yet know how brains work. if you don’t know how Y works you can’t really speak with certainty about whether X is an abstraction of Y. Period.https://twitter.com/tyrell_turing/status/1200072223299657728 …
-
I tend to agree with you
@GaryMarcus, but surely there are different levels of abstraction/fidelity in how closely current artificial methods model the biological. We have *some* non-trivial understanding of the biological system, so speaking of abstractions seems very reasonable
nobody said we shouldn't ponder potential abstractions; it's the moral certainty that i objected to, as being premature.
-
-
Could it not be possible for a neural network to generate the 'potential abstractions' needed for complex cognition? ANNs the best models we have today for generating complex behavior. So why should he
@tyrell_turing be taken to task for using the best known tools for his job? -
sort of like claiming democracy is perfect when it’s not? current models haven’t come close to@solving vision, language, planning etc, so they are invitation to do serious out of box thinking.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.