RushAndAPush

It's amazing how so many people on the internet feel so confident in their own intellectual abilities that they can read something that they don't understand and dismiss it as if it's non-important.

I think a lot of computer scientists have a hard time believing quantum computers are possible. Not saying I agree, but I've heard this viewpoint a number of times.

Fitting username.

Bioethicist like you are literally the worst people on earth.

It's going to be alright. I didn't get a job at Google either.

So what you're saying is that the mice that didn't have their genome edited didn't have a drastic life extension? I assume the improvements only occurred in the mice that had their genomes edited to reduce Yamanaka factors because they then artificially replaced the Yamanaka factors?

Deepmind isn't completely separate from Google. They have a team that helps apply their research to google products. I find it highly unlikely the team would be dissolved considering how successful and prestigious they are becomeing.

> Right now we're in the "low-hanging fruit" phase of (1) computers that are powerful enough to run neural networks, combined with (2) feedback algorithms that allow networks with lots of layers to learn effectively.

I'm not so sure about that. Places like Deepmind are not satisfied with simply having AI that does straight forward pattern matching problems (Though that's very important). They are moving into more complex problems like transfer learning, reinforcement learning and unsupervised learning for more complex, real world problems solving. They also seem to be making good progress on this as well.

> I doubt you'll get that, because nobody thinks that progress in machine learning will stop.

Robin Hansen is notoriously skeptical about the possibility that Deep Learning can make real gains. He for some reason thinks brain emulation is more likely to make large progress in AI.

>An AI winter doesn't mean that progress stops.

It doesn't completely stop, but progress would be at a snails pace.

> The hype then dies down. Research continues, though, until enough progress is made that machine learning starts to produce results that excite the public again, and the cycle goes into another hype phase.

I think we as a community may need to take a good long look at the hype cycle theory and be skeptical it has any merit.

I've read every comment in this thread and its filled mostly with peoples self congratulatory intellectual views. Nobody, not even Robin Hansen himself has given a good, detailed argument as to why the current progress in Machine learning will stop.

To say that Google and Microsoft only make operating systems and sell adds is a bit misleading. Both company's are constributing significantly to the development of Artificial Intelligence and quantum computers. These technologies are fundamental and pivotal to the success of humanity.

Why would this bring up an anti-trust case. It doesn't make any sense.

DeepMind is owned by Google and Spotify may not exist in five years due to increased pressure from other streaming platforms like Apple. Spotify is in a make or break phase right now.