>> From the article: “Deep learning, which is fundamentally a technique for recognizing patterns, is at its best when all we need are rough-ready results, where

>> From the article: “Deep learning, which is fundamentally a technique for recognizing patterns, is at its best when all we need are rough-ready results, where stakes are low and perfect results optional“ > It is somewhat embarrassing how many tasks, from customer service to sportswriting to language translation to article summarizing to concept art for films, can be handled by deep learning at its current level of competence. No, it's embarrassing how eagerly leaders will compromise quality to chase automation cost savings. The things you list, especially customer service and sports-writing, cannot "be handled by deep learning at its current level of competence." That doesn't stop people from forcing the results down our throats, though.