The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Dileep George no published score: only 1 usable exchange on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
1exchanges match
1on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered raw tape D 5 · C 5 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.60

Q What, what's, uh, because You know, we're very far from, uh, so what's your, I guess, uh, appreciation of the state of the market?

A Yeah, so I think there are some good reasons to be excited about. Um, many of the problems that deep learning is able to solve, uh, solve in the sense that Have reasonable solutions. You know, none of these problems are solved. So they are not, you know, vision is not a solved problem. Language understanding is not a solved problem, but they are good enough to be used in applications. And, uh, that's a position that we were not in before, before the deep learning revolution. Um, the, um, accuracy of speech recognition and accuracy of image classification has, and, and accuracy of translation has gone up Quite a lot compared to what the state of the art was before, ah, 2012. So there are reasons for excitement, but people also got overexcited about some of the results that we were getting from game playing, ah, you know. So all the excitement about deep reinforcement learning was because you could play games with very little knowledge about the game itself. You know, you just give it pixels and, oh, it learns to play the game. But those excitements Turned, turned out to be premature because, um, it's, yeah, game playing is, um, an easier problem compared to real world problems. Those, those techniques do not translate to real world problems. Um, so this applies, and AI goes through this game playing phase multiple times, you know. Games have been the driving force for many AI, u…

AI assessment note: “So there are reasons for excitement, but people also got overexcited about some of the results”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 400 conversations transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.