Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by robert_tweed 4401 days ago
I've been noticing a slight trend among the same group of people that are likely to use the big data buzzword without really understanding it, to also use deep learning in the same way, to simply mean "gain business insights from [obviously big] data".

As far as I know the only gold rush is around marketing surrounding this and related buzzwords, i.e., it's the latest thing that your business absolutely must be doing to keep up with your competitors. That particular usage of course has as little to do with actual deep learning as the misappropriation of big data has to do with anything.

Fortunately this trend has been a bit slower to take off, presumably because whereas big data is a fairly nebulous concept, it's much easier to correct someone when they talk about deep learning quite wrongly.
1 comments
agibsonccc 4401 days ago
That's the exact market I'm cashing in on. But rather than just be someone in the space who talks about it, I made it[1].

I think at the end of the day, the stuff talked about in the media may or may not have some merit (otherwise why would google or these other companies put resources in to it?)

Rather than read the blogspam, read the papers instead though. Try to understand the merits of what's going on and apply it to your use case.

[1]: http://deeplearning4j.org/

link
beaucronin 4401 days ago
Blogspam? I demand satisfaction!
link
agibsonccc 4401 days ago
Let me clarify: Techcrunch articles talking about papers being published.

Blogspam to me is just something that talks about the stuff at such a high level, there's no meat in it. Within that subset I'm talking about academic concepts where you can learn a lot more if you just read the papers.

link
agibsonccc 4401 days ago
Before I get bombarded here, I think it's best to clarify that the word blogspam is a term thrown around a lot around here.

When the press talks about an academic paper, they tend not to add much value in terms of actually explaining what's going on. I think people drawing their own conclusions from the original works is the better way to go. Obviously not everyone will agree with me here, but so be it.

link