I'm becoming more sympathetic to LeCun's views, but being able to train something that acts the tiniest bit like those who made the training data (authors, professors, researchers, etc) is an absolute juggernaut and will be for some time.
Re:The End of AI Frontiers
by ion_trapper on Saturday November 07, 2026 @03:33PM
(#50407797)
I empathize with LeCunn but he is a prime example of why scientists often make poor leaders. It’s too tempting to always do the cool and interesting thing instead of drilling down on the boring but reliable thing that actually creates value. There is of course a place for this kind of eternal curiosity and I hope he’s found it, but hyper-competitive industry may not be it.
They have different jobs.
For a corporation it is to make money. For a researcher it is to explore and illuminate. That exploration and illumination often leads to a landfall of new wealth generation is a happy accident that ensures that the monies are going to bet some of their capital in them, at least the wise ones.
Ironically, Yann is kind of known in academic circles for being the guy working on boring, unsexy stuff (deep learning) when all the other academics were doing sexy cutting edge SVMs and stuff. That’s probably why he got the Meta job in the first place.
Re:The End of AI Frontiers
by johnnyanmac on Sunday November 08, 2026 @02:22AM
(#50411130)
[delayed]
The author states "I consider the scaling-only focus to be both misdirected and not fun.". I get the point but also totally get the focus on scale out for now.