7 ms·
When A.I. Matures, It May Call Jürgen Schmidhuber ‘Dad’
- tunnuz 10y agoSeriously check out Schmidhuber's work (http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen), from his website:"Since age 15 or so, the main goal of professor Jürgen Schmidhuber has been to build a self-improving Artificial Intelligence (AI) smarter than himself, then retire.".
- bcaulfield 10y agoA remarkably inefficient plan to be lazy.
- eli_gottlieb 10y agoMind, it's pretty questionable how connectionism is supposed to give us "AIs" that can act autonomously and improve themselves.
- somerandomness 10y agoUnlikely
- nothis 10y agoAlways getting skeptical when you hear of a name before you hear of a concrete achievement. I can respect his research but a bit too much Jürgen Schmidhuber before even getting into what his contributions are.
- kevinskii 10y agoTo be fair, it's a popular magazine piece written for the layperson. I don't know enough about AI research to judge the value of Dr. Schmidhhuber's contributions, but I've seen his name multiple times in past HN discussions.
- alexmlamb2 10y agohttps://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=gLnCTgIAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao https://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=gLnCTgIAAAAJ&hl=en&... He's been an AI researcher for a while. I think his biggest contribution is understanding the vanishing gradient problem and creating the LSTM architecture. LSTMs are widely used in both industry and academia, and many neural net architectures that aren't LSTMs are heavily inspired by the LSTM idea. One of his students, Alex Graves, is a researcher at DeepMind who is seen as one of the top people in RNNs.
- joggery 10y ago>hear of a name before you hear of a concrete achievement That's an excellent criterion. I often wonder if many famous past intellectuals were mere celebrities where I can't recall a single achievement. And if one can't name a famous true idea in an current academic field, perhaps the field itself is worthless.
- BickNowstrom 10y agoIt is a poor criterion, because it is so subjective and dependent on PR machines. The OP just has not heard of any accomplishments, but anyone with a little expertise in deep (reinforcement) learning knows about the major contributions to the field by Schmidhuber. Using this criterion you are using popular media and fields you know not much about, to brush away the accomplishments of respectable scientists. Don't base your skepticism on your own lack of knowledge: that makes it selective -- You can not cut through the bullshit, if you don't know how to wield a sword.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 10y agoYeah as an easter egg. Seriously though, what title will it bestow on Wolfram?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- rl3 10y ago>Dr. Schmidhuber also has a grand vision for A.I. — that self-aware or “conscious machines” are just around the corner — that causes eyes to roll among some of his peers. I can't help but wonder if the sole reason AGI doesn't exist is because it hasn't been figured out yet. While that statement sounds obvious on the face of it, the implication is that we may already possess both the sufficient computational resources and human intelligence to realize its creation.
- oh_sigh 10y agoIt doesn't really tell us much. There is no reason ancient Athens or Taixue or Gundishapur couldn't have developed calculus or Newtonian physics. No resource was limiting them in the development, but those fields weren't developed until 1600+ years later.
- bcaulfield 10y agoArchimedes was close... https://www.sciencenews.org/article/prayer-archimedes https://www.sciencenews.org/article/prayer-archimedes
- NotUsingLinux 10y agoThat is so cool...
- NotUsingLinux 10y agoI think the printing press was a key invention which was needed for this. So many great things got lost because in history there was only 1 or few copies of it.
- Russell91 10y agoWe certainly have enough compute at this point. 10^15 flops should be more than enough to run the brain by pretty much any analysis. Part of the issue is that evolution had at least 1 million such creatures over 52,000,000 weeks to improve since monkeys. So while human intelligent design of AI will certainly be a better algorithm than evolution, we may actually be a bit shy computationally of easily training an AI system, in spite of having more than enough to realize one.
- apas 10y agoI was fortunate enough to attend his talks at MIT CSAIL while working there. Here are some notes in case anyone's interested -- [0] and [1]. I also recommend his TEDx talk. [0] https://www.dropbox.com/s/v6bbktuywoqv2w3/jurgen-talk-notes.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/v6bbktuywoqv2w3/jurgen-talk-notes.... [1] https://www.dropbox.com/s/ux53ism7fsxgo8x/jurgen-csail-talk2.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ux53ism7fsxgo8x/jurgen-csail-talk2...
- Teodolfo 10y agoJürgen maintains a lot of sock-puppet accounts (even on wikipedia and amazon reviews). Let's see if any of them show up in this thread. He is a perfectly good researcher and his students have done a lot of excellent work, but I don't approve of his choices to use an army of sock-puppets or his (I will try to put this charitably) somewhat non-standard ideas on how academic credit should be apportioned.
- robotresearcher 10y agoBut you're cool with anonymously posting a public accusation of unprofessional behaviour without supporting evidence? (edit: apparently people are cool with this. That's weird. I'm not claiming the parent is untrue, it's just that you shouldn't talk smack about people in public without presenting evidence if you don't use your real name.)
- kevinskii 10y agoClearly you're being downvoted by Teodolfo's sockpuppets.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- helperAI 10y agoHey Jurgen, I'm a big fan of your work
- ericjang 10y agoHey Jurgen, I'm a big fan of your work!
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- emmelaich 10y agoTo be fair that accusation is also mentioned in the article.
- partycoder 10y agoThe tone of the article title reminds me of the posts of the Mindpixel guy, who also claimed to have been developing strong AI but turned out to be a person with severe mental illnesses... This is not a good article please don't upvote it. If you think LTSM is interesting, I am 100% with you... but there must be for sure much better articles about LTSM or the author himself that you can pick from to share here. This article doesn't add a lot of value, takes a lot of effort to make it's point and feels like a huge waste of time when you finish reading it.
- obmelvin 10y agoYour post doesn't make sense - how is that related to this? Why is not up voting this article being a good HN user?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- BickNowstrom 10y ago> developing strong AI but turned out to be a person with severe mental illnesses Those are not mutually exclusive. If you want to actually claim that Chris McKinstry was only insane, and his project without any scientific merit, you should make the case for it. Brushing projects away, only because the conceiver of them was mentally ill, is not nice at all.
- partycoder 10y agoThe point is that "All AI will call X father" is a claim that someone like him would make. That was the entire point. My point is about the how the article is titled and written not the researcher.
- bradneuberg 10y agoJürgen Schmidhuber is an early neural net pioneer, especially with regards to making recurrent neural nets a reality. As others have mentioned he was instrumental with LSTMs, but also advised Alex Graves on his work with Connectionist Temporal Classification (CTC) that were instrumental in allowing neural nets to be used for speech recognition.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Animats 10y agoHe was too early. People have been futzing around with neural nets since the 1950s. We can now make them work, but the training process requires huge amounts of compute power to do a huge number of iterations making tiny changes on each cycle. This has only been feasible in the last few years.
- dekhn 10y agoyou're missing the importance of techniques that allow backprop along very deep nets. that's related to, but distinct from, the amount of computation required to train a model.
- DigPhysics 10y agoI think Juergen is an interesting and intelligent guy. Besides his work on RNN architecture, he also holds a belief that it is possible that a short computer program has generated our universe. I think it would be interesting for him to talk about the relationship between his belief that a deterministic universe theory is possible, with his practice of using statistical learning algorithms. Some people might view ANNs (including RNNs) as good learning algorithms for sorting out statistical patterns of probabilistic systems, but not as helpful for analyzing deterministic systems. But I think there is some good insight to be had from exploring the value of statistical learning algorithms on deterministic systems.