I have to admit, of the four, Karpathy and Sutskever were the two I was most impressed with. I hope he goes on to do something great.
When the next wave of new deep learning innovations sweeps the world, Microsoft eats whats left of them. They make lots of money, but don't have future unless they replace what they lost.
E.g. Oppenheimer’s team created the bomb, then following experts finetuned the subsequent weapon systems and payload designs. Etc.
You don't really need to look at history, that's basically science vs engineering in a nutshell.
Maybe history could tell us if that's an accident or a division that arose out of 'natural' occurrence, but I suppose a question for an economist or psychologist or sociologist how natural that could really be anyway or if it's biased by e.g. academics not financially motivated because it happens that there isn't money there; so they don't care about productising; leaving it for others who are so motivated.
Right, because those are two very different things. Science is about figuring out truths of how reality works. Engineering is about taking those truths and using them to make useful things.
People often talk in a way that conflates the two, but they are completely different activities.