Hacker News Reader

My gut response was, I think, a less rigorous version of this: Humans care about tasks our own brains are good at. If NNs are in fact decent approximations of the way our brains work, then it makes sense they will be anomalously effective on this subset of the "actual" problem space.

View on HN

You seem to be saying that ANNs are good at pattern recognition because BNNs are. That just defers it to the question why BNNs are good at it.

OTOH, the parent comment suggested we should draw our attention to the processes that produce the data and find correspondences to how NNs decompose it.

No, I'm saying that what we perceive as "being good at pattern recognition" is defined by the sort of pattern recognition BNNs are good at.

Which still doesn't explain precisely what sort of statistical inference BNNs are performing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com