TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Andreessen-Horowitz craps on “AI” startups from a great height

695 pointsby dostoevskyabout 5 years ago

42 comments

m0zgabout 5 years ago
&quot;Huge compute bills&quot; usually come from training, or to be more precise, hyperparameter search that&#x27;s required before you find a model that works well. You could also fail to find such a model, but that&#x27;s another discussion.<p>So yeah, you could spend one or two FTE salaries&#x27; (or one deep learning PhD&#x27;s) worth of cash on finding such models for your startup if you insist on helping Jeff Bezos to wipe his tears with crisp hundred dollar bills. That&#x27;s if you know what you&#x27;re doing of course. Literally unlimited amounts could be spent if you don&#x27;t. Or you could do the same for a fraction of the cost by stuffing a rack in your office with consumer grade 2080ti&#x27;s. Just don&#x27;t call it a &quot;datacenter&quot; or NVIDIA will have a stroke. Is that too much money? Not in most typical cases, I&#x27;d think. If the competitive advantage of what you&#x27;re doing with DL does not offset the cost of 2 meatspace FTEs, you&#x27;re doing it wrong.<p>That, once again, assumes that you know what you&#x27;re doing, and aren&#x27;t doing deep learning for the sake of deep learning.<p>Also, if your startup is venture funded, AWS will give you $100K in credit, hoping that you waste it by misconfiguring your instances and not paying attention to their extremely opaque billing (which is what most of their startup customers proceed to doing pretty much straight away). If you do not make these mistakes, that $100K will last for some time, after which you could build out the aforementioned rack full of 2080ti&#x27;s on prem.
评论 #22408738 未加载
评论 #22409109 未加载
评论 #22408697 未加载
评论 #22409832 未加载
评论 #22408881 未加载
评论 #22408651 未加载
评论 #22409044 未加载
评论 #22409239 未加载
评论 #22408687 未加载
评论 #22409715 未加载
评论 #22409355 未加载
评论 #22409786 未加载
评论 #22409248 未加载
shooabout 5 years ago
&gt; most people haven’t figured out that ML oriented processes almost never scale like a simpler application would. You will be confronted with the same problem as using SAP; there is a ton of work done up front; all of it custom. I’ll go out on a limb and assert that most of the up front data pipelining and organizational changes which allow for [ML to be used operationally by an org] are probably more valuable than the actual machine learning piece.<p>Strong agreement from me: I&#x27;ve never worked on deploying ML models, but have worked on deploying operations-research type automated decision systems that have somewhat similar data requirements. Most of the work is client org specific in terms of setting up the human &amp; machine processes to define a data pipeline to provide input and consume output of the clever little black box. A lot of this is super idiosyncratic &amp; non repeatable between different client deployments.
评论 #22410243 未加载
joshuaellingerabout 5 years ago
I just spent $50K on coloc hardware. I&#x27;m taking a $10K&#x2F;mo Azure spend down to a $1K&#x2F;mo hosting cost.<p>But the real kicker is that I get x5 the cores, x20 RAM, x10 storage, and a couple of GPUs. I&#x27;m running last-generation Infiniband (56gb&#x2F;sec) and modern U.2 SSDs (say 500MB&#x2F;sec per device).<p>I figure it is going to take me about $10K in labor to move and then $1K&#x2F;mo to maintain and pay for services that are bundled in the cloud. And because I have all this dedicated hardware, I don&#x27;t have to mess around with docker&#x2F;k8s&#x2F;etc.<p>It&#x27;s not really a big data problem but it shows the ROI on owning your own hardware. If you need 100 servers for one day per month, the cloud is amazing. But I do a bunch of resampling, simple models, and interactive BI type stuff, so co-loc wins easily.
评论 #22410135 未加载
评论 #22411507 未加载
评论 #22409925 未加载
评论 #22411358 未加载
评论 #22410073 未加载
评论 #22412373 未加载
评论 #22409815 未加载
评论 #22418330 未加载
评论 #22410379 未加载
评论 #22409869 未加载
评论 #22410336 未加载
raiyuabout 5 years ago
The number of places where machine learning can be used effectively from both a cost perspective and a return perspective are small. They are usually tremendously large datasets at gigantic companies, and they probably have to build in house expertise because it&#x27;s hard to package this up into a product and resell it for various industries, datasets, etc.<p>Certainly something like autonomous driving needs machine learning to function, but again, these are going to be owned by large corporations, and even when a startup is successful, it&#x27;s really about the layered technology on-top of machine learning that makes it interesting.<p>It&#x27;s kind of like what Kelsey Hightower said about Kubernetes. It&#x27;s interesting and great, but what will really matter is what service you put on top of it, so much so that whether you use Kubernetes becomes irrelevant.<p>So I think companies that are focusing on a specific problem, providing that value added service, building it through machine learning, can be successful. While just broadly deploying machine learning as a platform in and of itself can be very challenging.<p>And I think the autonomous driving space is a great example of that. They are building a value added service in a particular vertical, with tremendous investment, progress, and potentially life changing tech down the road. But as a consumer it&#x27;s really the autonomous driving that is interesting, not whether they are using AI&#x2F;machine learning to get there.
评论 #22408998 未加载
评论 #22408558 未加载
评论 #22410214 未加载
inthewoodsabout 5 years ago
Having briefly worked for an AI company, I agree with the conclusion that AI companies are more like services businesses than software companies. I would add only one other thing: to me going forward there likely won&#x27;t be &quot;AI companies&quot; - AI exists to power applications. And in my experience, unless the output is truly differentiated, customers aren&#x27;t willing to spend more for something &quot;powered by AI&quot; - they just expect that software has evolved to provide the kind of insights that AI sometimes deliver.
评论 #22410262 未加载
评论 #22410200 未加载
rossdavidhabout 5 years ago
So, way back in the last millenium, I did my Master&#x27;s thesis (way smaller deal than a Ph.D. thesis) on neural networks. Since then, I have looked in on it every few years. I think they&#x27;re cool, I like using them, and writing multi-level backpropagation neural networks used to be one of the first things I&#x27;d do in a new language, just to get a feel for how it worked (until pytorch came along and I decided for the first time that using their library was easier than writing my own).<p>So, it&#x27;s not like I dislike ML. But, saying an investment is an &quot;AI&quot; startup, ought to be like saying it&#x27;s a python startup, or saying it&#x27;s a postgres startup. That ought not to be something you tell people as a defining characteristic of what you do, not because it&#x27;s a secret but rather because it&#x27;s not that important to your odds of success. If you used a different language and database, you would probably have about the same odds of success, because it depends more on how well you understand the problem space, and how well you architect your software.<p>Linear models or other more traditional statistical models can often perform just as well as DL or any other neural network, for the same reason that when you look at a kaggle leaderboard, the difference between the leaders is usually not that big after a while. The limiting factor is in the data, and how well you have transformed&#x2F;categorized that data, and all the different methods of ML that get thrown at it all end up with similar looking levels of accuracy.<p>There used to be a saying: &quot;If you don&#x27;t know how to do it, you don&#x27;t know how to do it with a computer.&quot; AI boosters sometimes sound as if they are suggesting that this is no longer true. They&#x27;re incorrect. ML is, absolutely, a technique that a good programmer should know about, and may sometimes wish to use, kind of like knowing how a state machine works. It makes no great deal of difference to how likely a business is to succeed.
评论 #22409447 未加载
评论 #22409864 未加载
评论 #22409367 未加载
评论 #22409276 未加载
评论 #22410106 未加载
ativzzzabout 5 years ago
I agree with the author&#x27;s opinion about<p>&gt; I’ll go out on a limb and assert that most of the up front data pipelining and organizational changes which allow for it are probably more valuable than the actual machine learning piece.<p>Especially at non-tech companies with outdated internal technology. I&#x27;ve consulted at one of these and the biggest wins from the project (I left before the whole thing finished unfortunately) were overall improvements to the internal data pipeline, such as standardization and consolidation of similar or identical data from different business units.
评论 #22409037 未加载
评论 #22410204 未加载
correlatorabout 5 years ago
No need to look at AZ for this. If you&#x27;re building &quot;AI&quot; I wish you a speedy road to being acquired by a company that can put it to use. You&#x27;ve become a high priced recruiting firm.<p>If you&#x27;re solving a real problem and use ML in service of solving that problem, then you&#x27;ve got a great moat....happy trusting customers.<p>It&#x27;s not complicated
评论 #22409231 未加载
seibeljabout 5 years ago
I wrote an article I published a week ago about how AI is the biggest misnomer in tech history <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@seibelj&#x2F;the-artificial-intelligence-scam-is-imploding-34b156c3537e" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@seibelj&#x2F;the-artificial-intelligence-scam...</a><p>I wrote it to be tongue-in-cheek in a ranting style, but essentially &quot;AI&quot; businesses and the technology underpinning it are not the silver bullet the media and marketing hype has made it out to be. The linked article about a16z shows how AI is the same story everywhere - enormous capital to get the data and engineers to automate, but even the &quot;good&quot; AI still gets it wrong much of the time, necessitating endless edge-cases, human intervention, and eventually it&#x27;s a giant ball of poorly-understand and impossible to maintain pipelines that don&#x27;t even provide a better result than a few humans with a spreadsheet.
评论 #22410224 未加载
hariasabout 5 years ago
&gt;That’s right; that’s why a lone wolf like me, or a small team can do as good or better a job than some firm with 100x the head count and 100m in VC backing.<p>goes on to say<p>&gt;I agree, but the hockey stick required for VC backing, and <i>the army of Ph.D.s required to make it work</i> doesn’t really mix well with those limited domains, which have a limited market.<p>Choose one?<p>Also assumes running your own data center to be easy. Some people don&#x27;t want to be up 24x7 monitoring their data center or to buy hardware to accommodate the rare 10 minute peaks in usage.
评论 #22408775 未加载
评论 #22410797 未加载
评论 #22408703 未加载
评论 #22410395 未加载
评论 #22409273 未加载
moababout 5 years ago
I found it fun to read this after reading this other post that made the rounds today about AI automating most programming work and making program optimization irrelevant: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bartoszmilewski.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;02&#x2F;24&#x2F;math-is-your-insurance-policy&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bartoszmilewski.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;02&#x2F;24&#x2F;math-is-your-insuranc...</a>
dangabout 5 years ago
A thread about the original article, from a few days ago: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=22352750" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=22352750</a>
fxtentacleabout 5 years ago
I predict a great future for startups that sell pickaxes, err, tools for AI.<p>AI is like the new gold rush. And just like back then, it&#x27;s not the gold diggers that will get rich.<p>&quot;Most people in AI forget that the hardest part of building a new AI solution or product is not the AI or algorithms — it’s the data collection and labeling.&quot;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;startup-grind&#x2F;fueling-the-ai-gold-rush-7ae438505bc2" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;startup-grind&#x2F;fueling-the-ai-gold-rush-7a...</a><p>(from 2017)
评论 #22409306 未加载
评论 #22409448 未加载
评论 #22409454 未加载
whoisjuanabout 5 years ago
An many times all these AI computations go into solving mundane problems like &quot;What&#x27;s the likelihood of this Ad to perform well&quot;.<p>AI is so shiny that makes people want to jump as fast as they can into that boat but a reasonable objective analysis shows that a huge and not insignificant amount of software problems can still be solved without relying on the &quot;AI black box&quot;.
DrNukeabout 5 years ago
You all know a GTX 1070 with 8GB on a gaming laptop with 32GB is still doing wonders and covering 90%+ business cases when coupled with smart &amp; batch techniques the likes of you learn from fast.ai or under direct pytorch implementation, right??
_bxg1about 5 years ago
&gt; Training a single AI model can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) in compute resources<p>Why don&#x27;t they buy their own hardware for this part? The training process doesn&#x27;t need to be auto-scalable or failure-resistant or distributed across the world. The value proposition of cloud hosting doesn&#x27;t seem to make sense here. Surely at this price the answer isn&#x27;t just &quot;it&#x27;s more convenient&quot;?
评论 #22409017 未加载
评论 #22409091 未加载
jotakamiabout 5 years ago
&gt; Better user interfaces are sorely underappreciated.<p>This is why I’m much more excited by AR and VR than AI. Human brains are fucking amazing at certain kinds of data processing and inference and pretty mediocre at others. We should be focusing more on creating interfaces and data visualizations that unlock that superpower for wider applications.
dclabout 5 years ago
I&#x27;m not terribly convinced of point 4.<p>&gt; Machine learning will be most productive inside large organizations that have data and process inefficiencies.<p>I strongly believe ML is at worst dangerous and at best pointless here. Data and Process inefficiencies =&gt; garbage in, garbage out. ML is NOT a silver bullet in large organisations that have these issues*, I&#x27;ve seen managers try to adopt ML to solve issues, but the results are almost always suspect and&#x2F;or marginally better than simple if else rules but require a multiple people or teams to get all the data and models right.
aj7about 5 years ago
“ Embrace services. There are huge opportunities to meet the market where it stands. That may mean offering a full-stack translation service rather than translation software or running a taxi service rather than selling self-driving cars. Building hybrid businesses is harder than pure software, but this approach can provide deep insight into customer needs and yield fast-growing, market-defining companies. Services can also be a great tool to kickstart a company’s go-to-market engine – see this post for more on this – especially when selling complex and&#x2F;or brand new technology. The key is pursue one strategy in a committed way, rather than supporting both software and services customers.”<p>Exactly wrong and contradicts most of the thesis of the article - that AI often fails to achieve acceptable models because of the individuality, finickiness, edge cases, and human involvement needed to process customer data sets.<p>The key to profitability is for AI to be a component in a proprietary software package, where the VENDOR studies, determines, and limits the data sets and PRESCRIBES this to the customer, choosing applications many customers agree upon. Edge cases and cat-guacamole situations are detected and ejected, and the AI forms a smaller, but critical efficiency enhancing component of a larger system.
评论 #22409829 未加载
yogrishabout 5 years ago
Now a days DL models are becoming commodities very fast. By the time you train NN to solve a particular problem, a new efficient model is out somewhere and is available public. So you need to go through the process entirely or else you risk losing business. Unless your NN is so unique like you are handcrafting your own in which case you take lot of time to arrive at a best model and you need more PhDs.
评论 #22410557 未加载
leetroutabout 5 years ago
That is a great write up and very accurate description of both the costs and human intervention based on my experience with “AI” tools.
mtkdabout 5 years ago
AI on the algo side is only half the story -- it has to sit in a domain specific framework to be most effective<p>I see a lot of &#x27;bolt-on&#x27; tech emerging -- it looks mostly snake oil -- there is no obvious way to be competitive against teams that baked it in to the bare metal design<p>Also most commercial use-cases I&#x27;ve seen need effective ML more than anything else
dvfjsdhgfvabout 5 years ago
&gt; In the old days of on-premise software, delivering a product meant stamping out and shipping physical media – the cost of running the software, whether on servers or desktops, was borne by the buyer. Today, with the dominance of SaaS, that cost has been pushed back to the vendor. Most software companies pay big AWS or Azure bills every month – the more demanding the software, the higher the bill.<p>This irrational sheep mentality amuses me. Yes, tehre are some very specific cases where AWS &amp; ca. is clearly a better choice, but for the most cases I saw the TCO with hosting it on premises or renting servers is much lower, sometimes by an order of magnitude (in some cases even more). But people insist on doing it because others do it. We&#x27;ll soon have an entire generation of engineers completely hooked on AWS &amp; co. and not even realizing other solutions are possible, not to mention lower TCO.
blueyesabout 5 years ago
The A16Z piece makes all these points quite clearly. This editorial is trying to put a finer point on a sharp knife.
angry_octetabout 5 years ago
There are many problems which are simply impossible to do with traditional optimisation or human analysis, that ML can do really well at. But I get the sense that this is not the type of problem that these &quot;AI&quot; startups referred to are addressing. Instead its like &#x27;here is a problem I can charge for, with some ML magic it will be easy&#x27;. This is classic snake oil.<p>Being able to sift&#x2F;classify&#x2F;analyse data with ML really can be a &#x27;moat&#x27;, an extreme competitive advantage. But using &quot;AI&quot; doesn&#x27;t automatically get you there.<p>Separately, AWS is an expensive luxury, which is worth it if for some reason you can&#x27;t manage your own computers.<p>I really annoys me when analysts like this guy mangle together things which are obvious and then comes up with an unsupported conclusion, like &quot;second AI winter is coming man&quot;.
pandascoreabout 5 years ago
Agree mostly but he only talk about some AI start-ups that have a 1 to 1 model or at best a 1 to few. There is some AI startups like ours which have a 1 to many model. We use Computer Vision to collect data from video streams and sell data and transformed data through our API. The output of our models is the same for everyone.<p>Cost wise though it&#x27;s clearly being not knowledgeable about how it works or at least think all AI startups have huge training set. For many companies owning your hardware for training is a very easy step to rationalise cost.<p>It feels like an article written about all AI companies but actually (very) true only for some AI companies.
Zannethabout 5 years ago
I wonder how much of the formidable amount of computing resources required for deep learning can be attributed to wasteful and inefficient programming practices. A lot of the ML libraries that I see are written in Python with very little attention paid to aspects such as memory usage, cache coherency, concurrency, etc.<p>If we focused on writing more efficient software instead of demanding bigger and faster machines with more and more GPUs, would the cost of ML become more practical? More importantly, as the author pointed out, would smaller companies have a better chance at making advancements in the field?
atulkumabout 5 years ago
On the other hand some of the startup is doing absolutely fraud on the name of AI.I went to a self checkout store (AIFI.io). I did not touch anything but they charge me $35.10. According to the receipt I took 17 packs of snacks :) These guys are doing fraud on the name of AI. They have no technology no software just put up some camera and open a store so that they can defraud the investor. Anyone can try if intersted <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aifi.io&#x2F;loop-case-study" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aifi.io&#x2F;loop-case-study</a>
magwa101about 5 years ago
Here&#x27;s what cloud gives you that is very costly to implement internally, cost accountability. Analysts running the same queries over and over would peg internal hardware all the time. When we went to the cloud, we made a budget for each division, problem solved. Same with DS. Give them a blank check, they&#x27;ll spend it, manage to a budget, they&#x27;ll do it.
amaiabout 5 years ago
&quot;(my personal bete-noir; the term “AI” when they mean “machine learning”)&quot;<p>This is so right. Using a term &quot;artificial intelligence&quot; for machine learning is like using &quot;artificial horses&quot; to describe cars. It is even worse, since we cannot even define what &quot;natural intelligence&quot; actually is. Stop talking about &quot;artificial intelligence&quot;.
评论 #22413989 未加载
etrkabout 5 years ago
I interviewed at some AI companies a year or two back. They all had teams of people dedicated to support each client: to clean their data, train their models, integrate the domain-specific requirements, customize UIs, etc. They sold themselves as the next AI-powered mega-unicorns, but they were more like boutique consultancies with no obvious path to scale up.
评论 #22411557 未加载
moandcompanyabout 5 years ago
Related to the topic of marginal benefits of AI models versus their costs:<p>Green AI (Roy Schwartz, Jesse Dodge, Noah A. Smith, Oren Etzioni - 2019)<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;arxiv.org&#x2F;abs&#x2F;1907.10597" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;arxiv.org&#x2F;abs&#x2F;1907.10597</a>
marmadukeabout 5 years ago
I sometimes contribute to methodology projects in neuroscience (&quot;AI&quot; for scientists). The most tiring part of it is explaining essentially these things over and over. Very interesting to see the sentiment vindicated in Startupistan.
orasisabout 5 years ago
Nice article. The flip side of the coin is that all these “problems” are potential moats for a well tuned ML company to use to defend market share.
tzmabout 5 years ago
I view AI as the application of ML and ML as the implement (tool). Therefor, tooling efficiency is a competitive advantage of good ML projects.
laktakabout 5 years ago
&gt; “AI coming for your jobs” meme; AI actually stands for “Alien (or) Immigrant” in this context.<p>Finally a correct use of &quot;AI&quot;.
MacsHeadroomabout 5 years ago
Well, duh. Unless you invent AGI you&#x27;re always going to be fitting new models for new clients. The best case scenario is getting bought by a client and becoming their full-time ML tailor.<p>For a pure ML company to IPO they&#x27;d have to both solve intelligence and manufacture their own hardware. FOMO screwed a lot of investors who would&#x27;ve been better off buying Google stock.
bryanrasmussenabout 5 years ago
Generally the use of the phrase from a great height implies the height is one of morality, intellect, or valor (each of these decreasing in usage), I&#x27;m not exactly sure what the great height Andreessen-Horowitz craps from is composed of - maybe money?<p>I think they may just be crapping on them from a reasonable vantage point.
评论 #22408986 未加载
NickKampeabout 5 years ago
I guess I won&#x27;t mention Kubeflow here.....
rotruxabout 5 years ago
This is a terrific article. Two thumbs up.
lazzlazzlazzabout 5 years ago
Is the misspelling of &quot;Andreessen-Horowitz&quot; and use of &quot;A19H&quot; instead of &quot;a16z&quot; intentional?
评论 #22408720 未加载
评论 #22408416 未加载
allovernowabout 5 years ago
All of this might be true currently, but that&#x27;s because this current first generation &quot;AI&quot; (technically should just be called ML) is mostly bullshit. To clarify, I don&#x27;t mean anyone is lying or selling snake oil - what I mean by bullshit is that the vast majority of these services are cooked up by software developers without any background in mathematics, selling adtechy services in domains like product recommendation and sentiment analysis. They are single discipline applications accessable to devs without science backgrounds and do not rely on substantial expertise from other fields. That makes them narrow in technical scope and easy to rip off (hence no moat, lots of competition, and human reliance and lack of actual software).<p>The next generation of Machine Learning is just emerging, and looks nothing like this. Funds are being raised, patents are being filed, and everything is in early stage development, so you probably haven&#x27;t heard much yet - but these ML startups are going after real problems in industry: cross disciplinary applications leveraging the power of heuristic learning to make cross disciplinary designs and decisions currently still limited to the human domain.<p>I&#x27;m talking about the kind of heuristics which currently exist only as human intuition expressed most compactly as concept graphs and, especially, mathematical relationships - e.g. component design with stress and materials constraints, geologic model building, treatment recommendation from a corpus of patient data, etc. ML solutions for problems like these cannot be developed without an intimate understanding of the problem domain. This is a generalist&#x27;s game. I predict that the most successful ML engineers of the next decade will be those with hard STEM backgrounds, MS and PhD level, who have transitioned to ML. [Un]Fortunately for us, the current buzzwordy types of ML services give the rest of us a bad name, but looking at <i>these</i> upcoming applications the answers to the article tl;dr look different:<p>&gt;Deep learning costs a lot in compute, for marginal payoffs<p>The payoffs here are far greater. Designs are in the pipeline which augment industry roles - accelerate design by replacing finite methods with vastly quicker ML for unprecedented iteration. Produce meaningful suggestions during the development of 3D designs. Fetch related technical documents in real time by scanning the progressive design as the engineer works, parsing and probabilistically suggesting alternative paths to research progression. Think Bonzi Buddy on steroids...this is a place for recurring software licenses, not SaaS.<p>&gt;Machine learning startups generally have no moat or meaningful special sauce<p>For solving specific, technical problems, neural network design requires a certain degree of intuition with respect to the flow of information through the network, which both optimizes and limits the kind of patterns that a given net can learn. Thus designing NN for hard-industry applications is predicated upon an intimate understanding of domain knowledge, and these highly specialized neural nets become patentable secret sauces. That&#x27;s half of the most - the other comes from competition for the software developers with first-hand experience in these fields, or a general enough math heavy background to capture the relationships that are being distilled into nets.<p>&gt;Machine learning startups are mostly services businesses, not software businesses<p>Again only true because most current applications are NLP adtechy bullshit. Imagine coding in an IDE powered by an AI (multiple interacting neural nets) which guides the structure of your code at a high level and flags bugs as you write. This, at a more practical level, is the type of software that will eventually change every technical discipline, and you can sell licenses!<p>&gt;Machine learning will be most productive inside large organizations that have data and process inefficiencies<p>This next generation goes far past simply optimizing production lines or counting missed pennies or extracting a couple extra percent of value from analytics data. This style of applied ML operates at a deeper level of design which will change everything.
评论 #22408987 未加载