jeyoor
See further: https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20250123167/six...
However, standard caveats about the limits of those approaches should still apply: e.g. https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/sen...
In other words, I don't think MultiModel will be immune to fairly straightforward adversarial image attacks (although you might need a different adversarial network to generate them).
Furthermore, the problems being addressed by MultiModel (image recognition, natural language processing, machine translation) are problems that already have fairly robust deep learning results.
I'd be more interested if MultiModel showed significantly better results on problem areas that are currently difficult for standard deep learning approaches.
http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/FatTails.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs...
I've found the rigorous presentations of his ideas in statistics and finance to be very helpful.
It's amazing how much technological change we take for granted when choosing careers.
Admittedly, this was probably related to misconfiguration and database issues (i.e. having zero oversight or administrative maintenance of the underlying MS SQL Server). That specific local minimum might not apply to the context of the article (optimization in code and systems design).
>I have another idea:
>It's time to stop designing digital services to just be easy to use and start designing them to be understandable, accountable, trusted, and easy to use.
I think the author's triad of adjectives (understandable, accountable, and trusted) is widely applicable. It seems this article is more focused on software safety than political systems.
Following the author's analogy with the industrial revolution, I think the development of safety regulations for industrial workplaces in the US is fascinating. http://eh.net/encyclopedia/history-of-workplace-safety-in-th...
I wonder what safety regulations for software systems would look like.
On the technical side, I was intrigued that the "black box" of multilayer neural networks could provide a legal defense for Facebook in this case.
Often, the fact that neural networks are harder to analyze compared to other AI techniques is cited as a detriment, but in this legal case it could prove useful.
I've been hearing more folks in research and industry express the importance of applying simpler techniques (like linear regression and decision trees) before reaching for the latest state-of-the-art approach.
See also this response to the author's tweet on the subject: https://twitter.com/anderssandberg/status/803311515717738496
I also liked this quote from Lecture 23.
> A lot of times we ... confuse value with complexity.
> And many of the things that were the simplest in this subject are actually the most powerful.
> So be careful about confusing simplicity with triviality and thinking that something can't be important unless it's complicated and deeply mathematical.
I disagree based on the following:
1. I think NFL's definition of a universal learner is broader than the definition used by the average AGI researcher.
In practice, we are interested algorithms producing behavior at near-human levels of intelligence, not absolutely universal learning algorithms.
2. NFL does not seem to directly address the overall effectiveness of applying a combination of algorithms based on real-world experience to everyday problems.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/technology/china-mobile-te...
1. The emphasis on the importance of general problem solving
2. The clarity concerning various slippery definitions. ("Scientist," "Big Data," etc)
3. The high-quality links and citations