Non-technical, non-accurate. "Truthy", buzzfeed/huffpo quality.
A non-technical explanation of deep learning
11–20 of 139 posts
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#12This is the funniest refutation of the Chinese Room argument that I’ve seen. Note that at the end, it’s still the case that none of these people can recognize a cat.
Doesn't that mean it supports the Chinese room argument? I'm not sure I follow your reasoning.
(also, popular conciousness forgets that technically the Chinese Room argument is only arguing against the much narrower, and now philosophically unfashionable, "Hard AI" stance as it was held in the 70s)
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#13I love this, but Im always confused in these kinds of analogies what the reward / punishment system really equates to...
Also reminds me of Ted Chiang warning us that we will torture innumerable AI entities long before we start having real conversations about treating them with compassion.
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#14Does this article imply there are circumstances where a spreadsheet is a cat? What a poor example of technical writing.
Not the author, but to the author's defense, it is meant to be non-technical. And the first paragraph reads interesting to me.
Most non technical people would think there are zero circumstances where a spreadsheet could be a cat.
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#15This is the funniest refutation of the Chinese Room argument that I’ve seen. Note that at the end, it’s still the case that none of these people can recognize a cat.
Doesn't that mean it supports the Chinese room argument? I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. (also, popular conciousness forgets that technically the Chinese Room argument is only arguing against the much narrower, and now philosophically unfashionable, "Hard AI" stance as it was held in the 70s)
I understand the Chinese Room argument to be that because the human in the room doesn’t understand Chinese, the system doesn’t understand Chinese. In this case, none of the humans can recognize cats, but the collective can.
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#16Why is violence and praise being used to illustrate gradient descent? Why does each person get to see the entire input data?
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#17The problem with deep learning is opposite. You can understand most of it with just high school math. Advanced math is mostly useless because of the dimensionality of neural nets.
can you elaborate further on what you mean by 'dimensionality of neural nets'? Thanks!
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#18The problem with deep learning is opposite. You can understand most of it with just high school math. Advanced math is mostly useless because of the dimensionality of neural nets.
Yes, it’s really rather like alchemy in some sense. Stuff works, and often nobody knows exactly why.
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the author, but to the author's defense, it is meant to be non-technical. And the first paragraph reads interesting to me.
Most non technical people would think there are zero circumstances where a spreadsheet could be a cat.
That's part of the explanation. It might not make sense at first, but you'll figure something out to avoid being slapped.
Re: A non-technical explanation of deep learning
#20Does this article imply there are circumstances where a spreadsheet is a cat? What a poor example of technical writing.
He’s saying that the spreadsheet represents the “picture” of the cat in terms of pixels and RGB values etc.
The algorithm/workers are not really “looking” at a picture of a cat, they are analysing and looking for patterns in the data that defines the picture of the cat.