[friendzis]

> I'm not entirely convinced this type of iterative gap finding and filling is really much different than natural human learning behavior.

Take some artisan, I'll go with a barber. The human person is not the best of the best, but still a capable barber, who can implement several styles on any head you throw at them. A client comes, describes certain style they want. The barber is not sure how to implement such a style, consults with master barber beside, that barber describes the technique required for that particular style, our barber in question comes and implements that style. Probably not perfectly as they need to train their mind-body coordination a bit, but the cut is good enough that the client is happy.

There was no traditional training with "gap finding and filling" involved. The artisan already possessed core skill and knowledge required, was filled on the particulars of their task at hand and successfully implemented the task. There was no looking at examples of finished work, no looking at example of process, no iterative learning by redoing the task a bunch of times.

So no, human learning, at least advanced human learning, is very much different from these techniques. Not that they are not impressive on their own, but let's be real here.

[wegfawefgawefg]

overfitting vs generalizing

also we all know real people who fail to generalize, and overfit. copycats, potentially even with great skill, no creativity.