> You had to initialize your random vector very close to an actual cat image, and do gradient descent, before it "figured out" for itself about a cat and > a

> You had to initialize your random vector very close to an actual cat image, and do gradient descent, before it "figured out" for itself about a cat and > a rather large deep neural network, which was trained unsupervised to encode general images (not just cats) seem to be in contradiction, afaict, or was general vector initialized rather close general images?