Andrew Ng Quotes

It was a case of the technology catching up with the problem.

I grew up as a computer scientist, and I've always been fascinated by algorithms.

They were saying computers deal with numbers. This was absolutely nonsense. Computers deal with arbitrary information of any kind.

The word 'code' turns out to be a really important word for my book, 'The Information.' The genetic code is just one example. We talk now about coders, coding. Computer guys are coders. The stuff they write is code.

I always considered programming as being like modern-day wizardry. You could think of things in your mind and then make them happen.

The rise of Google, the rise of Facebook, the rise of Apple, I think are proof that there is a place for computer science as something that solves problems that people face every day.

Google is already overflowing with incredibly creative bright groups already working on lots of the software problems of the world.

Some people think technology has the answers.

Computing technology started out as number-crunching.

Computations are everywhere, once you begin to look at things in a certain way.

Intelligence is the faculty of making artificial objects, especially tools to make tools.

My work was fairly theoretical. It was in recursive function theory. And in particular, hierarchies of functions in terms of computational complexity. I got involved in real computers and programming mainly by being - well, I was interested even as I came to graduate school.

Not only have computers changed the way we think, they've also discovered what makes humans think - or think we're thinking. At least enough to predict and even influence it.

I think computer science, by and large, is still stuck in the Modern age.

The computing field is always in need of new cliches.

Computer Science is embarrassed by the computer.

Technology is fascinating.

Data helps solve problems.

So the thing I realized rather gradually - I must say starting about 20 years ago now that we know about computers and things - there's a possibility of a more general basis for rules to describe nature.

We all rely on technology to communicate, to survive, to do our banking, to shop, to get informed, but none of us knows how to read and write the code.

The idea of a computer winning the Nobel Prize for physics is not too unlikely, citing a computer as joint recipient. It's obviously not a huge leap to think of something similar happening in fiction.

I'd rather see artificial intelligence than no intelligence.

Machine learning is the science of getting computers to learn without being explicitly programmed.

A lot of the progress in machine learning - and this is an unpopular opinion in academia - is driven by an increase in both computing power and data. An analogy is to building a space rocket: You need a huge rocket engine, and you need a lot of fuel.

I don't program or code or anything like that.