I am in the "Yann is no longer the right person for the job" camp and I yet "LeCun failed to deliver anything that delivered real value to stockholders" is a wild thing to say. How do you read the list you compiled and say otherwise?
I think there’s something to be said for keeping up in the LLM space even if you don’t think it’s the path to AGI.
Skills may transfer to other research areas, lessons may be learnt, closing the feedback loop with usage provides more data and opportunities for learning. It also creates a culture where bullshit isn’t possible, as the thing has to actually work. Academic research often ends up serving no one but the researchers, because there is little or no incentive to produce real knowledge.
> LeCun failed to deliver anything that delivered real value to stockholders
Well, no, Meta is behind the main framework used by nearly anyone largely thanks to LeCun. LLaMA was also very significant in making open weight a thing and that largely contributed to avoiding Google and OpenAI consolidating as the sole providers.
It's not a perfect tenure but implying he didn't deliver anything is far too harsh.
Do you really think that people understand the value of PyTorch?
They master PyTorch, yet they fail to deliver value to investors.
They're probably the only company which hasn't monetized its models. They suck so much that they don't even bother to serve them to you and to make you pay for them.
These companies for example are earning money in return for their investment:
