Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Backpropagation does not correlate to the brain

Backpropagation does not correlate to the brain

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comquestionlearning
4 Posts 4 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Offline
    S Offline
    Stylianos Polychroniadis
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Intel’s neuro guru slams deep learning: ‘it’s not actually learning’ | ZDNet[^]

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • S Stylianos Polychroniadis

      Intel’s neuro guru slams deep learning: ‘it’s not actually learning’ | ZDNet[^]

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Mark_Wallace
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Davies said:

      The brain is the one example we have of truly intelligent computation

      He must know people that I don't know. But he's giving a straw-man argument. No-one ever said that backpropagation mimics the brain (or if they did, they were misinformed). Nothing we do in AI mimics the brain; none of the AI methodologies -- not even his Holy Grail neural networks, which a lot of poorly informed people have declared as mimicking the brain. The brain works with what is easiest defined as "highly compressed and merged 3D movies with smells and other sensory records attached". We don't have anything of artifice that can even come close to processing brain-level quantities of such data feeds -- Hell, we don't even have data of that kind, let alone the capacity to process it! So he's just talking the usual "what I'm doing is perfect, and what everyone who doesn't do what I'm doing is inferior!" bollocks.

      I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

      M L 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • M Mark_Wallace

        Davies said:

        The brain is the one example we have of truly intelligent computation

        He must know people that I don't know. But he's giving a straw-man argument. No-one ever said that backpropagation mimics the brain (or if they did, they were misinformed). Nothing we do in AI mimics the brain; none of the AI methodologies -- not even his Holy Grail neural networks, which a lot of poorly informed people have declared as mimicking the brain. The brain works with what is easiest defined as "highly compressed and merged 3D movies with smells and other sensory records attached". We don't have anything of artifice that can even come close to processing brain-level quantities of such data feeds -- Hell, we don't even have data of that kind, let alone the capacity to process it! So he's just talking the usual "what I'm doing is perfect, and what everyone who doesn't do what I'm doing is inferior!" bollocks.

        I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

        M Offline
        M Offline
        Minion no 5
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Agreed. If it was about natural intelligence he might have a point.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M Mark_Wallace

          Davies said:

          The brain is the one example we have of truly intelligent computation

          He must know people that I don't know. But he's giving a straw-man argument. No-one ever said that backpropagation mimics the brain (or if they did, they were misinformed). Nothing we do in AI mimics the brain; none of the AI methodologies -- not even his Holy Grail neural networks, which a lot of poorly informed people have declared as mimicking the brain. The brain works with what is easiest defined as "highly compressed and merged 3D movies with smells and other sensory records attached". We don't have anything of artifice that can even come close to processing brain-level quantities of such data feeds -- Hell, we don't even have data of that kind, let alone the capacity to process it! So he's just talking the usual "what I'm doing is perfect, and what everyone who doesn't do what I'm doing is inferior!" bollocks.

          I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Mark_Wallace wrote:

          No-one ever said that backpropagation mimics the brain (or if they did, they were misinformed).

          "Deep learning" implies actual learning. If it is measuring successes and keeping score, than I'd have to agree that learning is not the most ideal term to use. --edit I'm not seeking you out, before you get that idea. You simply had a good argument that I wanted to reply to :thumbsup:

          Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          Reply
          • Reply as topic
          Log in to reply
          • Oldest to Newest
          • Newest to Oldest
          • Most Votes


          • Login

          • Don't have an account? Register

          • Login or register to search.
          • First post
            Last post
          0
          • Categories
          • Recent
          • Tags
          • Popular
          • World
          • Users
          • Groups