4 ms·
That works only for cats vs. dogs toy classifiers. It had never ever worked for anything practical. And no, Deep Learning is high science. It is not just thro
by rg111 5y ago
That works only for cats vs. dogs toy classifiers.
It had never ever worked for anything practical.
And no, Deep Learning is high science. It is not just throwing piles of data to PyTorch and run it on a 8-GPU cluster.
I don't blame anyone having this view. Megacorps with billions of bucks are in a race to train the biggest language models, and that is the news every media focuses on.
- clircle 5y agoDeep learning is definitely not science
- rg111 5y agoWe still don't know how exactly things work inside. But we will, someday. We, once considered the existence of "unknown forces" in basic planetary motion. But we figured out later. There are many directions, one of them being the work being done by Bronstein et al. w/ Geometric Deep Learning.
- clircle 5y agoplanetary motion is a property of the natural world. Deep learning algorithms are not. Deep learning is not science.
- fuy 5y agoIn this sense computers and language, for example, are also not a property of natural world. So you can't have sciences that study and/or use computers or languages?