4 ms·
This may be true with large datasets, but with small datasets it's no contest. I don't have to show a kid a thousand slightly diffferent bananas in different e
by fenwick67 9y ago
This may be true with large datasets, but with small datasets it's no contest. I don't have to show a kid a thousand slightly diffferent bananas in different environments to teach them what a banana is.
- Isamu 9y agoTo be fair, on the one hand we are training computers on thousands of static photos of bananas. Kids are trained with continuous live action of bananas they are turning around, seeing with binocular vision, seeing from all angles, pulling apart, etc. Kids are taught with massive visual data.
- vokep 9y agoMaybe not a thousand, but the kid also has a wealth of understanding of greater concepts which the banana fits into even if never seen before. When there is such fundamentally different architecture of learning its kind of absurd to compare, at least to take such a comparison seriously. When AI can build a full world model then we'll be somewhere, I think reasoning is a dependency of that. We don't require thousands of examples of an object to be able to recognize it partially because we aren't learning from scratch. You're able to look at a banana for the first time ever and automatically fit it into many already known classes (object, edible, yellow, elongated shape) based on reasoning about it vs past experience, so the new information learned to make it permanently recognizable is very small.