> The crucial point is that the machine does not see a cat or dog, as we do, but a set of numbers. This seems to miss the point - to follow that pattern, "Huma

> The crucial point is that the machine does not see a cat or dog, as we do, but a set of numbers. This seems to miss the point - to follow that pattern, "Humans do not see a cat or a dog, they receive a set of neural impulses". If a human "knows" those impulses represent a cat, you could also surely say an artificial neural net "knows" those numbers represent a cat - and if you ask "how" a human/NN knows this, I guess the answer is the same -- different levels of visual abstraction (numbers/impulses trigger neurons that recognize edges and shapes, which become eyes become faces become bodies become animals...) trigger different levels of the network that are familiar with those abstractions and turn them into the end result: "That is a cat."