3 ms·

Perhaps I was being unclear with "...in nature". I meant that it was academic in origin, and still much of the work is academic. Right, and I'm wondering why y

Perhaps I was being unclear with "...in nature". I meant that it was academic in origin, and still much of the work is academic. Right, and I'm wondering why you don't consider Google's work to be academic? I'm trying to nail down your definition of "academic". Is there something about Google's work that is qualitatively different? Is is simply that it's not performed on the campus of a school? Beyond the scope of NLP, suppose we're discussing two chemists. One works at, say, Merck, while the other works at a university (perhaps on a grant from Merck). What's the difference between the work that the two are doing? EDIT: in the interest of not being snarky, I may as well come out and say it: your comments gave me every impression of an elitist attitude.

orijing 16y ago
Ah, I meant academic, as in "came out of a university." Sorry I left that unclear. I wasn't saying it was "qualitatively different," but that it did not develop speech recognition. It was the work of many, MANY brilliant people, and to say Google developed it would be avoiding so many details. The same with the chemists. There's nothing inherently different simply because of the fact that they work at different places. Suppose chemist at university develops chemical A for some process X and chemist at Merck develops chemical B for the same process X. Both are equal contributions; certainly it would be wrong to say that chemist 2 solved process X. Is that more sensible?