felippee

4 ms·

1.
The Atom of Intelligence(blog.piekniewski.info)
3 points by felippee 3y ago|0 comments
2.
by felippee 5y ago
Hilbert spaces with infinite dimension you mean?
3.
AI the No Bullshit Approach(blog.piekniewski.info)
3 points by felippee 6y ago|1 comments
4.
by felippee 6y ago
How is this substantially different from a 3 year old post here: https://distill.pub/2017/feature-visualization/ ? I mean they added some web interface widgets, some cool java script and stuff, but is that what Mi
5.
by felippee 8y ago
They had to take down all their content but here is a sample of what it looked like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnQ-BS7Ui54
6.
CBS Killed a Fan Based Star Trek TNG Recreation in Unreal Engine(discordapp.com)
5 points by felippee 8y ago|1 comments
7.
by felippee 8y ago
I feel _exactly_ the same. And I know many, many other people who feel the same thing too. Apple will eventually run into a wall, like it did before in the 90's. They don't have a clear vision or connection to the actual user. The
8.
by felippee 8y ago
Oh, somebody got triggered here! Yes, there is sarcasm in this post! And if you don't like it, fine. But please, don't give me bullshit about being a jerk. I think you probably have not seen a real jerk in your life yet.
9.
by felippee 8y ago
This may indeed be interesting, but that is not what this paper focuses on.
10.
by felippee 8y ago
I'm not sure how to interpret these pictures. They don't suggest anything to me. And certainly don't suggest anything about the quality of representations. And BTW how do you measure quality of representations?
11.
by felippee 8y ago
Yes it is certainly not fair that the network they spend one page explaining and probably weeks training and researching can be hardwired in 30 lines of python. This is very unfair. But this is the reality, and so the post states. Also the
12.
by felippee 8y ago
Author of the post here: I think their paper would have been much better if they included the piece of code which I wrote in python to explain that the transformation they are learning is obviously trivial and the fact that it works is not
13.
by felippee 8y ago
Author of the post here. I totally agree that negative stuff should be published. But without the fanfares. I think they could have changed the tone of that paper and I would not have an issue with it. It is likely that if they did that the
14.
by felippee 8y ago
The post mocks them primarily for learning the trivial coordinate transform. That is the core of the paper and ridiculing this piece leaves very little left on the table. The ImageNet test is just an appendix, a cherry on the cake, a curios
15.
by felippee 8y ago
Author here (of the post, not the paper). I think you don't understand how science works. The whole point of the exercise (which indeed may have been forgotten these days) is to attack ideas/papers. The first line of attack should
16.
by felippee 8y ago
No, there is something special to machine learning and AI in general. E.g. SIGGRAPH papera are different. No one there claims to solve more than they actually do solve. DL is soaked with hype and self congratulatory BS. The best way to spot
17.
by felippee 8y ago
Right, I totally agree. What is more, I think this same result could actually be sold without the pompous deep learning bullshit and be received quite differently. If they did not claim to invent the wheel, but rather modestly noted their o
18.
by felippee 8y ago
Author here: seriously I'm here at the front page for the second day in the a row!? The sheer viral popularity of this post, which really was just a bunch of relatively loose thoughts indicates that there is something in the air regard
19.
by felippee 8y ago
It's not like humanity really needs another chess playing program 20 years after IBM solved that problem (but now utilizing 1000x more compute power). I just find all these game playing contraptions really uninteresting. There are plen
20.
by felippee 8y ago
> Also why does every single result has to be breathtaking? If you build the hype like say Andrew Ng it better be. Also if you consume more money per month than all the CS departments of a mid sized country, it better be.
21.
by felippee 8y ago
I'm skeptical, and side with Rodney Brooks on this one. First, reinforcement learning is incredibly inefficient. And sure, humans and animals have forms of reinforcement learning, but my hunch it that it works on an already incredibly
22.
by felippee 8y ago
I sure agree there are many interesting things going on, there is no question about that. Also most of them are toy problems focused in some restricted domains, while a huge bag of equally interesting real world problems is sitting untouche
23.
by felippee 8y ago
Sure, but have you heard about Moravec's paradox? And if so, don't you find it curious that over the 30 years of Moore's law exponential progress in computing almost nothing improved on that side of things, and we kept playin
24.
by felippee 8y ago
Sure it is not technically a loan. But it carries the same sentiment change when it blows up. People get extremely cautious, to the point of skipping some really good ideas. And not just those VC's that made the bets but everyone else
25.
by felippee 8y ago
> Yes. Sensationalist. Yes, perhaps. But I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are entitled to yours. And time will tell who was right. > So your explicit reason for omitting Waymo, as I understand it, is that it didn't sup
26.
by felippee 8y ago
Hi, it appears that "sensationalist garbage" triggered quite a bit of a discussion. This is typically indicative that the topic is "sensitive". Perhaps because many people feel the winter coming as well. Maybe, maybe not
27.
by felippee 8y ago
OK, the definition of scalable is crucial here and it causes lots of trouble (this is also response to several other posts so forgive me if I don't address your points exactly). Let me try once again: an algorithm is scalable if it can
28.
by felippee 8y ago
Hey, a small advice for the future: never build your belief entirely on a youtube video of a demo. In fact, never build your belief based on a demo, period. This is notorious with current technology: you can demonstrate anything. A few year
29.
by felippee 8y ago
> but it’s moving down the right path Time will tell. I think DL is amazing, but is no the right path towards solving problems such as autonomy. I think if you enter this field today, you should definitely take a look at other methods th
30.
by felippee 8y ago
I certainly encourage everybody to consult the source material! Man, this is a blog, opinion by default not perfect. But when I hear the keyword "major advances" I'm highly suspicious. I had seen already so many such "ma

More ›