Neuroscientists Battle Furiously over Jennifer Aniston

I was hoping to read something about a discussion between neuroscientists. Instead I'm just reading one theory from one neuroscientist, without much arguments of proof that it's based on. Let alone any arguments from other scientists why he might be wrong.

*(2012)<p>and here is the Seung v Movshon debate that the article alluded to: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=q4KrhDZQ088" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=q4KrhDZQ088</a><p>Seung is the same guy who wrote the famous 1999 Nature paper on non-negative matrix factorization (NMF). He once expressed his regret that his NMF paper became too famous to the point of eclipsing his main work (neuroscience). What a problem to have!

Being old enough to find out that the &quot;Grandmother neuron&quot; and &quot;Jennifer Aniston&quot; neuron are synonyms.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Grandmother_cell" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Grandmother_cell</a>