What is he even arguing here? That he has been cheated out of some kind of credit? Credit for what? Afaict he has never actually shown something novel based on his ideas to work in a way that has mattered.
> What is he even arguing here? That he has been cheated out of some kind of credit?
He's (at least to some extent) arguing that if you're going to say someone's paper is "mostly wrong", saying the same things 4 years later should probably warrant a "ok, you were right" at least.
His argument may be silly or pathetic or false or even true, but it has nothing to do with how long he held the SOTA record of any known machine learning task.
"Ideas" here being few commonly used words put together barely forming a sentence, not some algorithm, research or deep paper.
Ie. the whole "idea" being "hey, for gai we need something different than this gtp3" tweet, not "idea" as in "hey I invented this new thing I call LSTM, check it out [link to paper, results what not]".
Well, the LSTM fella does pop up later calling out Lecun for "rehashes but doesn't cite essential work of 1999-2015". Which I guess does mean people with real "ideas" are also fed up with him?
"Deep learning pioneer Jürgen Schmidhuber, author of the commercially ubiquitous LSTM neural network, arguably has even more right to be pissed [...]"
He's (at least to some extent) arguing that if you're going to say someone's paper is "mostly wrong", saying the same things 4 years later should probably warrant a "ok, you were right" at least.