3 ms·
He looks to be peddling the same info that he has been peddling for twenty years. If he has had no large scale projects or results to show in this time, why wou
by OutOfHere 2y ago
He looks to be peddling the same info that he has been peddling for twenty years. If he has had no large scale projects or results to show in this time, why would someone listen to him now? I am not saying his ideas don't have merit, only that it doesn't look like he can be trusted to implement them well. Perhaps someone else can take over his ideas and do a better job.
- observationist 2y agoSome things are incremental and tedious. Hawkins is taking a rigorous, incremental, and tedious approach to realizing his dream of brain like AI. That means synthesizing thousands of neurology papers and isolating each component of neurons and searching for evidence of algorithms and so on. It doesn't mean glomming on to the latest and greatest deep learning algorithms, optimizing for a particular application, product, or market. Hawkins is doing research; not productization.
- OutOfHere 2y agoYes, there is need for research, but the proof is always in the pudding. Is his goal to help along AI architectures, or is it to efficiently simulate the brain instead? If it's the former, the perhaps the incremental lessons ought to be productionized as they are discovered. Either way, there is need for a benchmark score to be attacked, so the score can be targeted for improvement as time progresses. In contrast, LLMs are tested on numerous benchmarks, improving steadily year after year. All the best to his dedicated efforts.
- aeternum 2y agoRemember that neural networks were invented in 1943 and were not productized until much later. Often it takes time for the engineering to catch up to the theory.