3 ms·
That’s why I said practically speaking. And realistically I don’t think you can even generously consider anything prior to perceptrons.
by kenjackson 4y ago
That’s why I said practically speaking. And realistically I don’t think you can even generously consider anything prior to perceptrons.
- PartiallyTyped 4y agoML is so much more than DL / NNs. I recommend that you open a book like Bishop or ESL, the overwhelming majority of ML has been non DL going back to the 70s.
- kenjackson 4y agoMost of that I learned doing non-ML stats work. But regardless, my point was the history of it is far less than chemistry. Let’s say ML started at the turn of the 1990s to be generous. Still much younger than chemistry.
- _delirium 4y ago> realistically I don’t think you can even generously consider anything prior to perceptrons I mean, sure, but for the practical reason that perceptrons (proposed 1943, implemented 1958) are about as old as digital computers, and ML as a field is tied up pretty strongly with the existence of computers.
- kenjackson 4y agoI wasn’t comparing ML to digital computers though — but rather chemistry. Theory of computation and algorithms (bedrocks of CS) far predate digital computers.