3 ms·
> In my view comprehension isnt about 'generalization via compressed archetypes' as in ordinary NNs... How is this helpful? Be specific. The point being made
by wokwokwok 6y ago
> In my view comprehension isnt about 'generalization via compressed archetypes' as in ordinary NNs...
How is this helpful?
Be specific.
The point being made is that inductions can be made by a compressed representation of the data.
No one is claiming this is a key insight to AGI; you’re just taking the word “comprehension” and arbitrarily assigning it some personal meaning.
This is why mathematicial descriptions are useful; you’re personal view of what “comprehension” means isn’t relevant here.
The article doesn’t discuss comprehension.
That is something you’ve, as far as I can tell, meaninglessly brought into this discussion.
How are your insights helpful for improving DNNs?
Be specific.
- trap_chateau 6y agoSorry but I have to chime in here. His thoughts seem insightful and relevant to discussion. You are calling his contributions 'meaningless' and condescendingly telling him twice to 'be specific'. That's not how things are meant to be discussed around here and not how you get an answer out of someone.
- mjburgess 6y agoYip. I couldn't move myself to type the obvious: a person replying to my comment doesn't determine whether I am "on topic".
- wokwokwok 6y agoI’m comfortable, reading his comment history, that a blunt request to explain how the the comments are relevant to the OP (and the failure to articulate them when bluntly requested to do so) I indicates that what seems “insightful” is in fact, not falsifiable and therefore nothing more than armchair philosophy. I’m not into that, so if it terminates the discussion then so be it. There was nothing meaningful to discuss.