|
|
|
|
|
by michaelochurch
4432 days ago
|
|
"Deep learning" has an actual meaning, which is the use of neural networks with multiple hidden layers. (Networks with one hidden layer can theoretically approximate any mathematical function, but it's the investigation of deeper networks, with more, that has reinvigorated neural net research over the past few years). I'm sure it is being misused, but there is a legitimate, technical meaning to it. "Data scientist" seems to be a way for mathematically literate programmers to separate themselves from the teeming masses of commoditized ScrumDrones. It seems to mean, "this person is smart enough to deserve dibs on the most interesting work". Perhaps it's an attempt to back to the R&D culture that existed before biztards commoditized us and our work. Most of the fuss around "data science" makes me think of the Fundamental Theorem of Employment. If you're hired for a job, it's typically either (1) to do a job the person hiring you can't do for himself or (2) to do a job he doesn't want to do. Type-1 workers are respected and have autonomy. Type-2 workers are generally ill-regarded (because the boss thinks he can do the worker's job). "Data Scientist" seems to be a way for a programmer to say, "Only hire me for Type-1 work". I can't say I'm a huge fan of the title's existence, because most companies use "data scientist" as Biztard for "person who does watered-down machine learning", but I suppose the current climate is an improvement over the AI winter. |
|