Re:“Deep Learning has outlived its usefulness as a buzz-phrase”
by bennofs on Friday January 05, 2018 @08:11PM
(#16083199)
I like it, at least from the little that I read about it. The name describes the core of what it is: differentiate programs, in order to figure out how changes the the program affect the output and using that for optimization purposes. Do we really need to invent obscure, new names for everything just so that it sounds catchy?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:“Deep Learning has outlived its usefulness as a buzz-phrase”
by tomdre on Friday January 05, 2018 @08:31PM
(#16083285)
Couldn't agree more. A technique should be judged by its usefulness. Not by its catchiness.
Re:“Deep Learning has outlived its usefulness as a buzz-phrase”
by pasquinelli on Friday January 05, 2018 @08:43PM
(#16083343)
to be fair though, the subject is a judgement of a technique's name, not a judgement of the technique itself.
Re:“Deep Learning has outlived its usefulness as a buzz-phrase”
by wastewaste on Sunday January 07, 2018 @05:47AM
(#16090311)
not to forget, naming is one of the harder problems considered in programming.