[blackbear_]

You really don't need to be so cynical, some things just need time. Light bulbs were patented only after 40 years of work by multiple researchers, and it took another half a century of work to achieve decent efficiency. Neural networks themselves have been in development for 50 years before taking off recently, and for most of that time people working in the field were considered nuts by their peers.

But if you have concrete criticism on the idea feel free to articulate.

[tuatoru]

> Light bulbs were patented only after 40 years of work by multiple researchers

Not actually true. The early ones were patented, but used filaments made of materials like platinum, and glass-blowing and evacuation were costly as well at the time.

Edison's genius was for innovation rather than invention: making things manufacturable at scale, reducing costs, and setting up profitable sales systems. A systems man.

[TaupeRanger]

I'm not cynical. I'm just tired of people making wild claims which inevitably don't pan out. Neural networks are the exact opposite of this. They became popular because people SHOWED that they were useful. The early papers on perceptrons and later feedforward NNs SHOWED that they are capable of solving classification problems at the very least. Those mentioned in my original reply have shown NOTHING for all their grandiose claims about human brains and "thought". If your theory works, then go ahead, IMPLEMENT HUMAN THOUGHT. Until then, stop writing about how you "solved" one of the deepest and most profound mysteries in human history.