81–90 of 105 posts
> For example, my coworkers let me take the lead in writing an academic paper about TensorFlow 2, even though my contributions to the technology were smaller than theirs. Sounds like some folks didn't like writing! :)
The relevant question isn't who wrote the bulk of a paper - it's whose name appears first on the list of authors :).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure! While Google Brain is focused specifically on AI, Stanford as a whole conducts research across a very wide range of disciplines. As a result, my network at Stanford has a more diverse collection of interests. As a PhD candidate I have worked with or am connected to people interested in neuroscience, radiation treatment planning, finance, control, economics, computer systems, and (yes) machine learning, among ot…
how much real-world collaboration do you get to do with students, postdocs and faculty in those other disciplines? (ie; what is the experience like when one does a phd in computational tools as opposed to a specific stem domain?)
But that is just my experience. Some of my labmates had PhD's in which the majority of their work was collaborative, across disciplines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern ML certainly has some cool applications, but none seem revolutionary. Can you list any that are?
When you demo some tech to 5 year old and he mistakens it for magic, I think it’s revolutionary enough. In current state of art, Atari RL, AlphaGo, AlphaFold, GPT3, GANs, Pix2pix, CLIP, DeepFakes etc are very very revolutionary. You can take any of these and go back in time even just 15 years ago, people won’t believe what was accomplished. However, I do believe we are far and away from generalized intelligence.
The comparison to fire and electricity aside --- you're absolutely right, we can do very interesting things with machine learning & automatic differentiation these days!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern ML certainly has some cool applications, but none seem revolutionary. Can you list any that are?
Off the top of my head: When paired with a robotic medium, we'll be able to automate most pattern driven jobs like construction, welding, surgery, anything really that doesn't require human element to it and is more of a pattern matching behavior. This is extremely revolutionary and will put a ton of people out of work. Any pattern-dependent job that does not require human interaction will be at risk, even coding (as…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The relevant question isn't who wrote the bulk of a paper - it's whose name appears first on the list of authors :).
This guy is [1], if I found the right paper. Though the order appears to be alphabetical. [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.01855
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This guy is [1], if I found the right paper. Though the order appears to be alphabetical. [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.01855
It's not alphabetical.
Looks alphabetical for me
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I find this "AI-first" branding to be really off-putting Honestly my first reaction was a snarky "Well, your moderation and support channels certainly are" given all the horror stories we hear about people getting locked out of their entire google accounts with no recourse or access to humans to appeal / investigate.
I kind of love how google has destroyed their reputation on the customer support side and doesn't seem to care. I believe at a certain point it will affect their bottom line. They must be betting that they develop passable AI support before that happens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yikes, jesus christ. I wonder what they think of people at "regular companies" like mine or people that graduated from "regular schools".
I myself graduated as one such commodity PhD student, and I don’t consider it as a derogatory term, mere reality. Contrast to regular jobs, the PhD nowadays is more like the arts where the top candidates disproportionately reap the benefits. If you’re not at a top tier university or a star advisor your academic prospects are middling from the beginning. Not saying you can’t make it happen, a lot of my friends do, but…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 1850, few people felt that electricity was particularly profound either. That year, William Gladstone, Chancellor of the Exchequer, asked Michael Faraday why electricity was valuable. Faraday replied, "One day sir, you may tax it." [1]. The electric motor had been invented (by Faraday), but it couldn't do any useful work and had to sit in a pool of mercury to function. Electric lighting had been invented, but the…
So when Sundar Pichai says AI is more profound than electricity, it's possible he's right. It's just that we're still in its 1850, so we can't see it yet. You can make a claim that "This might be revolutionary! It's just too early to tell." about literally anything .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This guy is [1], if I found the right paper. Though the order appears to be alphabetical. [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.01855
It's not alphabetical.
I just don't get some HN assertions...