News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Understanding Deep Learning by ldjkfkdsjnv on Sunday November 26, 2023 @05:42PM (#38425820)
Nobody is building real technology with either of those algorithms. Sure, they are theoretically helpful, but they arent valuable anymore. Spending your precious life learning them is a waste
Re:Understanding Deep Learning by nabla9 on Sunday November 26, 2023 @06:04PM (#38426038)
>Spending your precious life learning them is a waste

So you really did not learn them.

There is nothing wrong with being user. You don't have to know how compilers work to use compiler. But then you should not say you understand compilers.

In the same way, you probably would benefit from a book "Using deep learning", not "Understanding deep learning".

Re:Understanding Deep Learning by ldjkfkdsjnv on Sunday November 26, 2023 @06:06PM (#38426053)
I know them and am a founder of a vc funded ai startup. Nobody is deploying naive bayes algorithms
Re:Understanding Deep Learning by nabla9 on Sunday November 26, 2023 @06:09PM (#38426082)
> Nobody is deploying naive bayes algorithms

Exactly my point. You are so into user perspective that you think you are arguing against me.

Re:Understanding Deep Learning by Philpax on Sunday November 26, 2023 @06:37PM (#38426326)
Yes, they’re not deploying them. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t still help to know the fundamentals of the field, especially when you’re trying to innovate.
Re:Understanding Deep Learning by yeukhon on Monday November 27, 2023 @03:34AM (#38429672)
Yeah. But you didn’t build a plane without knowing physics right?

Nobody deploys a textbook algorithm because everyone knows textbooks algorithms and there are no advantages. So, no, there is real value in learning the fundamentals, dear founder.

Re:Understanding Deep Learning by coef2 on Sunday November 26, 2023 @06:57PM (#38426483)
I started my journey in machine learning fifteen years ago. Ironically, at that time, my professor told me that neural networks were outdated and trying them wouldn't result in publishable research. SVMs were popular and emphasized in my coursework. I concur that SVMs don't hold as much practical significance today. But the progress in AI and ML is generally unpredictable, and no one knows what theory leads to the next leap in the field.
Re:Understanding Deep Learning by xcv123 on Sunday November 26, 2023 @05:45PM (#38425857)
So what? The same fundamental machine learning concepts are still relevant to deep learning.

It's almost like arguing that everything you learned as a Java developer is completely useless when a new programming language replaces it.

Re:Understanding Deep Learning by spencerchubb on Sunday November 26, 2023 @09:08PM (#38427285)
This brings up an important question: Is a topic useful to learn if you will never use it in your life?

To attempt answering this question, we can look at LLMs as an analogy. If you include code in the training set for an LLM, it also makes the LLM better at non-coding tasks, suggesting that sometimes learning something makes you also better at other things. I'm not saying the same necessarily applies for learning these "old school" AI techniques, but it's a decently analogy at least.