Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
1–10 of 156 posts
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#2there was this tutorial on how to implement a more biological accurate neuron in javascript.
https://medium.com/javascript-scene/how-to-build-a-neuron-ex...
I asked the author how to put it into use, how to train it? because clearly this biological neuron is not a smooth function. but I didn't get any response.
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#3Everything Hinton says echoes strongly Kuhn's philosophy on the scientific paradigm. I guess it's not too much of a surprise that he thinks this is the case, but it also shows how intelligent (and shockingly humble) he is to make such a statement.
I wish I'd heard of the conference, dammit!
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#4Obviously a clickbait headline, few people think current tech will lead to AGI, but while we all wait on a new breakthrough in AI, we can build much more impressive systems with what we have now than even a few years ago.
I went to a talk from people who had built more scalable training algorithms for Restricted Boltzmann Mahcines (which Hinton was a pioneer in) a few months ago and asked them why they had chosen to use RBMs. Besides the waffly answers about how generative models were more interpretable than discriminative models, the real answer seems to have been that this was a research program that had started when RBMs were still in vogue, and their funding was tied to it, and once it ran out they were going to switch to investigating Generative Adversarial Networks like everyone else.
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#5If you are interested in biologically plausible models of cognition check out 'vector symbolic architectures'
and 'associative memory' research of the 90s.
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#6Everything Hinton says echoes strongly Kuhn's philosophy on the scientific paradigm. I guess it's not too much of a surprise that he thinks this is the case, but it also shows how intelligent (and shockingly humble) he is to make such a statement. I wish I'd heard of the conference, dammit!
I think it's great that top researchers are actually learning from Kuhn's observations. I have hope that humanity can indeed learn from its earlier historical mistakes, but it requires us to be very aware of them in order to collectively avoid them.
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#7Everything Hinton says echoes strongly Kuhn's philosophy on the scientific paradigm. I guess it's not too much of a surprise that he thinks this is the case, but it also shows how intelligent (and shockingly humble) he is to make such a statement. I wish I'd heard of the conference, dammit!
Do you mean the theory of scientific revolution ?
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#8If you are interested in biologically plausible models of cognition check out 'vector symbolic architectures' and 'associative memory' research of the 90s.
Biological plausibility is just silly. What it mostly does is just put artificial constraints on the problem that doesn't need to be there. It's all mathematics. However you want to interpret or metaphorize the mathematics is up to each math-phobic field, but constraining yourself to what randomly evolved serves little good.
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#9Everything Hinton says echoes strongly Kuhn's philosophy on the scientific paradigm. I guess it's not too much of a surprise that he thinks this is the case, but it also shows how intelligent (and shockingly humble) he is to make such a statement. I wish I'd heard of the conference, dammit!
Do you mean the theory of scientific revolution ?
That's the one. I'm actually just finishing it up now, so it's fresh enough in my mind that it jumps out at me in application.
Re: Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over
#10Everything Hinton says echoes strongly Kuhn's philosophy on the scientific paradigm. I guess it's not too much of a surprise that he thinks this is the case, but it also shows how intelligent (and shockingly humble) he is to make such a statement. I wish I'd heard of the conference, dammit!
I think it's great that top researchers are actually learning from Kuhn's observations. I have hope that humanity can indeed learn from its earlier historical mistakes, but it requires us to be very aware of them in order to collectively avoid them.
I agree.
Mr Hinton was somewhat vague and brief in his statements here, though. What do you think the crisis point is that he's reached exactly? (It must be sure enough for the man who introduced the paradigm in the first place to have caught on, yet the change of thought process unclear enough for him to recognize that it will be somebody newer who will have to introduce something else)