3 ms·

You see that from papers published at top ML conferences. Top contributors are often from FAANG. Some papers are clearly applications.

OnlineGladiator 7y ago
FAANG isn't "most industries" by any stretch. This ignores healthcare, automotive, pharmaceutical, agricultural, and so many more industries. All you've done is point out that there are a lot of ML papers coming from tech companies. Nobody is disputing that. Why do you assume this generalizes to most industries?
- account73466 7y ago
  Go to Google Scholar, type your favorite company and "deep learning". If you find no paper from that company, chances are high their stock price is not beating S&P 500 over the last 5 years. Also, top S&P 500 companies by market cap are "AAPL","MSFT","GOOG","AMZN","FB","BABA".
  - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
    This is a No True Scotsman argument. Who said anything about beating the S&P 500? I said most industries, and every comment you are redefining what that means.
    - account73466 7y ago
      >> Who said anything about beating the S&P 500? I said. >> and every comment you are redefining what that means That is false. You could learn something. Instead, you wasted my time.
      - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
        1) I ask why this applies to most industries 2) You point out it applies to FAANG 3) I say FAANG isn't most industries 4) You say most industries must only include those better than the S&P 500 5) I point out a flaw in your reasoning 6) You insist you are right, upset that I tried to ask a question 7) I summarize what happened and exit this thread
        account73466 7y ago
        "1) I ask why this applies to most industries 2) You point out it applies to FAANG" That is a lie because I said "often" in "You see that from papers published at top ML conferences. Top contributors are often from FAANG. Some papers are clearly applications." without saying that FAANG = most industries. Instead, I said you can see that from these conferences. Thus, you made it up. "4) You say most industries must only include those better than the S&P 500" That is a lie. I didn't say that. I said "If you find no paper from that company, chances are high their stock price is not beating S&P 500 over the last 5 years." I only mentioned a correlation and said nothing about your "most industries". You misinterpret the text. Fortunately, the text is written so it was easy to prove you are liar, boy.

OnlineGladiator 7y ago

FAANG isn't "most industries" by any stretch. This ignores healthcare, automotive, pharmaceutical, agricultural, and so many more industries. All you've done is point out that there are a lot of ML papers coming from tech companies. Nobody is disputing that. Why do you assume this generalizes to most industries?

account73466 7y ago
Go to Google Scholar, type your favorite company and "deep learning". If you find no paper from that company, chances are high their stock price is not beating S&P 500 over the last 5 years. Also, top S&P 500 companies by market cap are "AAPL","MSFT","GOOG","AMZN","FB","BABA".
- OnlineGladiator 7y ago
  This is a No True Scotsman argument. Who said anything about beating the S&P 500? I said most industries, and every comment you are redefining what that means.
  - account73466 7y ago
    >> Who said anything about beating the S&P 500? I said. >> and every comment you are redefining what that means That is false. You could learn something. Instead, you wasted my time.
    - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
      1) I ask why this applies to most industries 2) You point out it applies to FAANG 3) I say FAANG isn't most industries 4) You say most industries must only include those better than the S&P 500 5) I point out a flaw in your reasoning 6) You insist you are right, upset that I tried to ask a question 7) I summarize what happened and exit this thread
      - account73466 7y ago
        "1) I ask why this applies to most industries 2) You point out it applies to FAANG" That is a lie because I said "often" in "You see that from papers published at top ML conferences. Top contributors are often from FAANG. Some papers are clearly applications." without saying that FAANG = most industries. Instead, I said you can see that from these conferences. Thus, you made it up. "4) You say most industries must only include those better than the S&P 500" That is a lie. I didn't say that. I said "If you find no paper from that company, chances are high their stock price is not beating S&P 500 over the last 5 years." I only mentioned a correlation and said nothing about your "most industries". You misinterpret the text. Fortunately, the text is written so it was easy to prove you are liar, boy.