5 ms·

Hinton qualified that statement by adding, "but I do think there's going to have to be quite a few conceptual breakthroughs." He explicitly conditioned his beli

by cs702 6y ago

Hinton qualified that statement by adding, "but I do think there's going to have to be quite a few conceptual breakthroughs." He explicitly conditioned his belief on future conceptual breakthroughs that have not been made yet. Also, his statement is not a prediction; it starts with "I do believe." Here's the full quote, copied verbatim from the article: > I do believe deep learning is going to be able to do everything, but I do think there’s going to have to be quite a few conceptual breakthroughs. For example, in 2017 Ashish Vaswani et al. introduced transformers, which derive really good vectors representing word meanings. It was a conceptual breakthrough. It’s now used in almost all the very best natural-language processing. We’re going to need a bunch more breakthroughs like that. Please don't criticize him or the article without first reading it in full.

bo1024 6y ago
Yeah, it's a bit tricky ... like saying "Turing Machines are going to be able to do everything, but we'll need quite a few conceptual breakthroughs." Hard to say what percent of progress we've made since 1936 toward artificial general intelligence (whatever that means).
- cs702 6y ago
  In principle, yes, of course, because we use Turing machines for deep learning :-) but I think Hinton's point is much less broad than you imply: He believes "AGI" ultimately will be achieved with deep learning approaches, as opposed to other approaches, e.g., symbolic AI.
  - bo1024 6y ago
    Yes, but "quite a few conceptual breakthroughs" leaves a lot of room open for if it would be at all similar to deep learning today.
    - cs702 6y ago
      Agree :-) Hinton's comment was meant as, and is, an educated guess, expressed as a belief -- much like expressing belief that P≠NP, say, or that string theory will prove to be a dead end in Physics. FWIW, I happen to agree with Hinton, but only time will tell if we're right!

by cs702 6y ago

bo1024 6y ago

Yeah, it's a bit tricky ... like saying "Turing Machines are going to be able to do everything, but we'll need quite a few conceptual breakthroughs." Hard to say what percent of progress we've made since 1936 toward artificial general intelligence (whatever that means).

cs702 6y ago
In principle, yes, of course, because we use Turing machines for deep learning :-) but I think Hinton's point is much less broad than you imply: He believes "AGI" ultimately will be achieved with deep learning approaches, as opposed to other approaches, e.g., symbolic AI.
- bo1024 6y ago
  Yes, but "quite a few conceptual breakthroughs" leaves a lot of room open for if it would be at all similar to deep learning today.
  - cs702 6y ago
    Agree :-) Hinton's comment was meant as, and is, an educated guess, expressed as a belief -- much like expressing belief that P≠NP, say, or that string theory will prove to be a dead end in Physics. FWIW, I happen to agree with Hinton, but only time will tell if we're right!