4 ms·
Stop calling it "Machine Learning" and "Neural Networks" if you don't want the attention. Do we refer to code or computers as "Machines?". That kind of language
by bischofs 10y ago
Stop calling it "Machine Learning" and "Neural Networks" if you don't want the attention. Do we refer to code or computers as "Machines?". That kind of language is just begging for skynet references.
Any sort of elaborate processing network could be called "Neural" or maybe even a fancy linked-list . Something more reasonable like a learning network would keep the sensationalism down. Im sure we can come up with better names...
- justin66 10y ago> Do we refer to code or computers as "Machines?" I do, sometimes. I don't know where I picked up the habit, to be honest, but it might date back to the eighties or nineties. (I know I'm not the only one)
- bischofs 10y agoFair enough, but take anything in computers and replace it with "Machines" and it illustrates the point. ram could be called "Machine memory" or a network could be called a "Machine communication matrix" or in the reverse "Terminator 3: rise of the computers"
- justin66 10y agoYeah, I won't try to defend the "machine learning" moniker, except to point out that it's not nearly as dorky as "deep learning."
- cpburns2009 10y agoWith the prevalence of VMs (virtual machines), I don't think it's a stretch to call physical computers "machines". Granted, I usually hear the term "computer" or "box" used instead. Besides that moot point, I completely agree with you.
- mljoe 10y agoHow about "statistical inference"? This is not an uncommon term for ML techniques in the statistical community.
- bischofs 10y ago"Terminator 4: uncontrolled statistical inference"