Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The paper was written by highly accomplished ML researchers who don’t have any stake in Apple’s continued success. Framing this peer-reviewed research written by respected authors as “sour grapes” is intellectually dishonest.


> Framing this peer-reviewed research

How do you know it was peer-reviewed? What venue had accepted this paper for publication?


how many papers do apple publish under their own CDN/domains

this was certainly a first for me when i saw it pop on hn the other day


They publish papers pretty frequently https://machinelearning.apple.com/research?domain=Speech%20a...

Doesn’t mean they are peer reviewed


got it thanks


It's easy to argue about the people who write the paper and their incentives. It takes a lot more effort to prove that the data, the procedure or the conclusion in the paper has flaws, and back it up.


If they get paid by apple, they have a stake


This kind of statement isn’t productive. Everyone has a bias. If you don’t believe the paper is valid, I’d like to hear your substantive critique.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: