> If in fact every paper that claims a better performance over state of the art was true we would have solved AI by now. "Better" is not a single axis. By your

> If in fact every paper that claims a better performance over state of the art was true we would have solved AI by now. "Better" is not a single axis. By your logic, all I need to do is jump higher and higher, and sooner or later I will be able to fly! You aren't alone in this line of thinking. This fallacy has been written all over "AI" since we started calling it "AI"! That was the biggest mistake of all: by calling any arbitrary project "an Artificial Intelligence", we declare it an instance of the end goal! Now it just needs to be a "better", never "different". And that's what it means for a company to fail: it doesn't just need to be better, it needs to be different. If we don't allow failure to happen, we can never explore "different".