I'd be a lot more forgiving if the site that was linked was an actual blog post that contained information on how deep learning helped tackle this problem. But all the site is, is a way to aggregate emails while throwing buzzwords in your face.
I'd be a lot more forgiving if the site that was linked was an actual blog post that contained information on how deep learning helped tackle this problem. But all the site is, is a way to aggregate emails while throwing buzzwords in your face.
If the OP had actually posted a blog talking through things he did and how the NN helped and why he believes it is actually learning something useful and not just learning the noise, then this would certainly be interesting. But I've seen far too many people take powerful, flexible models with a large number of parameters and throw them at simple problems, with insufficient data and thought.
I'd normally give someone the benefit of the doubt...but taking the sum total of the quality of the linked web page, the complete lack of any meaningful information, as well as op's reply to my comment that added no real useful information regarding the actual benefit of throwing deep learning at this, I'm still inclined to stick to my original feelings regarding this post.
Redin/Zillow et al won't show you cap rates.
There is of course option c). That would be that taking a contrarian view on the technology will provide a strategic advantage to a business. But I don't see how that would apply here.