Thanks Robert! Very interesting. It still amazes me that articles can be written without much knowledge of the subject matter (re: statements that assess overall status and quality comparisons).
For instance: > Numenta’s algorithms also operate in a network, but they are aimed at > faithfully recreating the behavior of repeating circuits of roughly 100 > neurons found in the outer layer of the brain called the neocortex. The number "100" was clearly pulled out of thin air. And: > Marcus says Hawkins’s algorithms mimic only some of the known mechanisms at > work in the brain, and that the majority of its function still remains a > mystery. Demonstrations of Numenta’s technology have so far been limited, he > adds. “I haven’t seen them try to handle natural language understanding or > even produce state-of-the-art results in image recognition,” he says. > Obviously this is also true of industry pundits also. Nobody mentions the vast superiority of pre-CLA work on visual hierarchy - (a demo recently shown by Matt Taylor of earlier technology where the tech could distinguish many distinctions with high granularity such as different objects moving into and out of visual fields; moving behind other objects; distinguishing partially occluded objects etc.) Well, at least in this case, any news is good news! :-) Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 8, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Robert Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've had a google alert set for "numenta" for a few weeks now. Today it spoke > to me for the first time. It said: > http://www.technologyreview.com/news/536326/ibm-tests-mobile-computing-pioneers-controversial-brain-algorithms/
