You weren't talking about science overall; you were talking about a specific piece of it. You aren't wrong about overall science, you are incredibly naive and ignorant about a specific piece of science.
The one thing we can all agree on this festive season is that your opinions about anything is hot garbage. Happy holidays!
I am not imagining anything. I am going off what you said, as quoted in my previous reply.
It’s not an individual blog post you stupid fuck. It’s about hyping up unproven and untested shit in order to get clicks. What happens when this piece of science is debunked? How will that affect public perception of use of tax funds? You are right that science needs to be presented to a wide audience in order to continue its support. You are a stupid mother fucker for thinking that hyping up unknown science is in a useful way to go about it.
Deep learning hype is. And the research is dying since its making no real progress. Soon it will be just another useful optimization technique in industry and a chapter in a textbook in schools.
False. The government, like usual, is behind the curve and on the deep learning/AI hype train currently.
Maybe. I have a view skewed towards academia. The field is beginning to get rekt by replication issues and the fact that there are thousands of papers submitted to conferences that all have the following format:
I don't know what hype bubbles you're watching pop but the hype is at Cleganebowl levels in robotics, vision and autonomous vehicles from where I'm standing.
Yeah industry needs a few years to catch up to the boredom. Biggest reason its hyped is because VC are chasing it, thats changing soonish.I don't know what hype bubbles you're watching pop but the hype is at Cleganebowl levels in robotics, vision and autonomous vehicles from where I'm standing.
I mean, the first time we came to the thought of, "So we make this chain of weighted convolutions or whatever and end up with a system we can only kind of probe from on the outside and if we spend enough $$$ on data input it might get some good results" was back in, I don't know, 2014. Deep learning has gotten steadily better since, but I think it's getting more and more hype even if people are coming to that same realization.
We probably agree then. I think the massive glut of papers like that is just because you don't need to do shit to get that 0.002%, so you can coattail ride all day without producing anything novel or worth reading.
