That story makes entirely non controversial statements. Standing by that story is not interesting. They weren't controversial in 2012 either
i stand by virtually every word that I predicted about deep learning limitations in 2012 new yorker article. bar hasn’t moved: Is “Deep Learning” a Revolution in Artificial Intelligence?https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-deep-learning-a-revolution-in-artificial-intelligence …https://twitter.com/jeremyphoward/status/941409308918427648 …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I do think that these were very good arguments in 2012! But don't repeat "What Computers Can't Do" with a version of "what stochastic gradient descent on feedforward networks might find a bit difficult"...
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I see one word in this sentence I bet you don't stand by: "Norvig’s group is now working within Hinton"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I guess you haven't read my book "Artificial Intuition - The Improbable Deep Learning Revolution"
-
Where I write about Alpha Zero. Which totally debunks your theory that intuition machines cannot do logical inferences.
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.