3 ms·
Wow, I had no idea that Yann LeCun was also this based. I've figured that it was relatively rare to hear people advocate for the superiority of unsupervised met
by Der_Einzige 5y ago
Wow, I had no idea that Yann LeCun was also this based. I've figured that it was relatively rare to hear people advocate for the superiority of unsupervised methods - but I guess it isn't if a titan like him does. It's good to hear because epistemologically I just do not believe that most learning is anything but unsupervised. There are very few good labels for our data relative to how much data we process in an information theory sense.
- webmaven 5y ago> It's good to hear because epistemologically I just do not believe that most learning is anything but unsupervised. I have a feeling that the lines between the supervised and unsupervised categories will get increasingly blurred, with semi-supervised, self-supervised (eg. like self-attention) and adversarial (eg. GANs) approaches mixing together in strange ways.
- burning_hamster 5y agoI used to think that given enough time, more people would also learn that there are no substantial differences between supervised and unsupervised learning. However, I have come to believe that this might not happen any time soon. The supposed difference between supervised and unsupervised can be easily explained (label / no label -- duh?!). It is much harder to explain, why that distinction is ultimately a mirage. Couple this with a million low quality blog posts on SEO steroids by data grand wizards and machine learning architects, I doubt that even a good text book jointly written by Bengio, Hinton, and LeCun would convince the ML hype train otherwise. But there is always hope!