@GaryMarcus I would like in fact to hear a solid and testable proposal based on your 20 years of insisting how ML is not on the right track (as you said in an earlier tweet in this week), instead of another essay.https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1200613819518599169 …
agreed. but we need consensus about what the problems are before we can find solutions not appeals to ever bigger data sets when Bengio recently acknowledged core of what I said about generalization in 2001 it was first time I saw ML leadership really engage core problem.
-
-
I disagree that we need a consensus. You're a researcher whose been in the field for decades and has owned several AI companies. If you wanted to publish a solution to one of these problems you could have. A lack of consensus hasn't been holding you back.
-
fact check: i founded and ran one small company for two years and sold it and the IP; the second i launcher just 6 months ago. the rest of my career i worked primarily as a cognitive scientist, and never have had the ML or compute resources you have available at
@DeepMindAI - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
and we need to focus on the right problems; not sentence prediction. 2001 book proposed lots of specific challenges that might profitably guide research. eg bengio’s new emphasis on relationships is very much along lines of TAM chapter 3
-
What we need are problem specifications that are reasonably achievable in the adjacent possible. This is extremely difficult to formulate. Proposals to get to Mars need specifications of steps in between to get there.
End of conversation
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.