Childhood Curiosity:
* At five, Geoffrey Hinton experienced a puzzling phenomenon on a bus ride home from school.
* A penny placed on the velvet seat moved uphill, which defied his understanding and sparked a sense of wonder.
* He tried the experiment multiple times, trying to understand the strange occurrence.

Remembering the Experience:
* Hinton remembered the specific details of the bus ride, including the side of the bus and the seating location.
* The unsolved mystery stayed in his mind for years, fueling his curiosity and desire to find an explanation.

Later Understanding:
* As a teenager, Hinton studied physics and finally understood the reason behind the penny’s movement.
* The vibration of the bus caused the penny to move uphill due to the angle of the flock on the velvet seat.

Education and Science:
* Hinton attended his mother’s school in the countryside, which had a strong focus on agriculture.
* He encountered teachers with varying levels of expertise and enthusiasm for science.
* Some teachers inspired his interest in science, while others were less engaging.

Grammar School Entrance Exam Failure:
Geoffrey Hinton failed the grammar school entrance exam due to his strong agricultural accent.

Rejection from Clifton College:
Hinton’s parents tried to enroll him in Clifton College, but he was denied admission due to his accent. The school required him to stay in primary school for another year to fix his accent.

Unpleasant Experience at Prep School:
Hinton felt isolated and out of place at the British prep school due to his family’s political beliefs. The school emphasized muscular Christianity, which conflicted with his secular upbringing. He had to attend compulsory religious services, including sermons condemning Marxism.

Math Teacher’s Unique Discipline:
Hinton had a math teacher named S.T.P. Wells who had unconventional discipline methods. Wells once grabbed two boys by the hair and banged their heads together to stop them from talking.

Introduction to School by Sadistic Art Teacher:
Hinton’s introduction to the school involved an art teacher who was known for being sadistic.

The Cane Incident:
Hinton was punished severely with a bamboo cane by an art teacher for running in the changing room, despite his explanation that it was against the rules. The punishment left Hinton with a sense of grievance towards the teacher and Catholics in general.

Challenging Authority:
Hinton’s father’s strictness instilled in him a tendency to challenge authority. This tendency would later play a role in shaping his intellectual and moral development.

Religious Education and Circular Arguments:
Hinton questioned the teacher’s claim that all good things come from God, arguing that it was a circular argument. He felt that the teacher’s statement assumed that good things came from God because they were good, rather than providing evidence for God’s existence.

“Russia” Response:
When asked where he thought all good things came from, Hinton responded with “Russia.” This unexpected answer reflected his nonconformist attitude and his lack of alignment with the culture of the school.

Science Teaching and Parental Support:
Despite his unhappiness at the school, Hinton’s parents insisted that he stay due to the good science teaching. Hinton eventually came to enjoy the science lessons and developed a passion for the subject.

Early Discomfort with Mathematics:
Geoffrey Hinton struggled with mathematical concepts, particularly functions, during his high school years. He had a concrete mindset and preferred mechanical analogies to understand abstract ideas. It wasn’t until he started programming as a graduate student that functions made sense to him.

Understanding as a Goal:
Hinton emphasizes the importance of deep understanding, aiming to comprehend concepts well enough to build them from scratch. He applies this approach to various fields, including psychology and emotions.

Cambridge University:
Hinton’s academic journey took an unexpected turn when he left Cambridge after a month due to the overwhelming pressure. He spent time in London doing odd jobs and reading literature, eventually developing an interest in architecture.

Architecture and the Reality of Practice:
Hinton reapplied to Cambridge to study architecture but discovered the mundane reality of the profession during a summer internship. Disillusioned by the practical constraints, he switched back to natural sciences with the support of his tutor, highlighting the flexibility of the Oxbridge approach.

Background and Education:
Geoffrey Hinton studied physics, physiology, and chemistry at Cambridge University, with a particular interest in neurophysiology. He felt disappointed with the lack of understanding of how the brain works in his physiology courses, specifically regarding the central nervous system. Hinton was fascinated by how the brain gives rise to emotions and sensations and wanted to delve deeper into its mechanisms.

Genetics and Ideology:
Hinton’s father, a biologist, prohibited him from studying biology in school due to his belief that macroscopic traits are caused by complex gene interactions, contrary to the standard theory of one gene, one trait. This decision was influenced by communist ideology, which rejected the idea of genetics determining individual traits. Despite this, Hinton pursued physiology at Cambridge, finding it intriguing and novel.

Physiology Courses and Disappointment:
Hinton found physiology courses captivating, especially the prospect of learning about the central nervous system in the final term. However, he was disappointed with the teaching, which focused solely on the electrical impulses and chemical interactions between neurons without explaining how these processes contribute to brain functions and emotions. Hinton felt that the explanations were purely descriptive and did not address the fundamental question of how the brain works.

Philosophical Musings:
Hinton found philosophy fascinating but ultimately unsatisfying due to its lack of empirical testing. He appreciated Bernard Williams, a philosopher who welcomed students’ ideas and sparked interesting discussions. Hinton believes that philosophy’s focus on language and style, rather than empirical evidence, limits its ability to provide concrete answers.

Science vs. Philosophy:
Hinton contrasts science and philosophy, highlighting science’s empirical approach and ability to establish seemingly crazy yet true facts. He emphasizes the importance of external validation in science, allowing theories to be tested and verified.

Elegance and Truth:
Hinton acknowledges the allure of elegant solutions in mathematics and physics, where symmetries and patterns often lead to discoveries. However, he questions whether this approach is universally applicable, particularly in biology, where elegance alone may not guarantee truth.

Francis Crick’s Perspective:
Hinton recalls Francis Crick’s skepticism towards the idea that elegant solutions always lead to truth in biology. Crick’s view suggests that biological complexity may not always conform to simple and elegant patterns.

The Path from Philosophy to Science:
Hinton’s dissatisfaction with philosophy led him to pursue psychology, which he considered a more scientific discipline. The distinction between natural sciences and social sciences is clarified, with Cambridge psychology falling under the former category.

Cambridge’s Psychology Course:
Hinton’s psychology education at Cambridge focused on scientific aspects, including rat studies and signal detection theory. He felt disappointed that the course lacked insights into human psychology, particularly psychoanalysis.

Existential Psychoanalysis Tutorial:
Hinton approached his tutor, seeking permission to attend weekly tutorials in existential psychoanalysis in London. The college surprisingly agreed to fund these tutorials, demonstrating their commitment to a liberal education. While Hinton appreciated the psychoanalyst’s beautiful girlfriend, he struggled to grasp the concepts of Husserl and Heidegger.

Hinton’s Intellectual Development:
Hinton’s psychology course had limited impact on his intellectual growth. Existential psychoanalysis sparked his interest, but he acknowledges the difficulty in understanding certain concepts. The discussion moves on to other aspects of Hinton’s intellectual development, skipping over the rest of his psychology course.

Psychology’s Lack of Theoretical Foundation:
Hinton criticizes psychology’s lack of a proper theory that explains behavior. He finds it lacking compared to physics, which has theories that explain phenomena.

Behaviorist Psychology’s Limited Scope:
Hinton describes an experiment he conducted with children to study their attention to shape and color. The experiment aimed to determine if children’s attention shifted from color and texture to shape as they grew older.

Unexpected Behavior in the Experiment:
During the experiment, a bright five-year-old child pointed out a red circle among yellow triangles and a yellow square. The child reasoned that Hinton had made a mistake in painting the circle red, indicating an understanding of intentions and errors.

Complexity Beyond Existing Theories:
This behavior demonstrated a level of reasoning that was beyond the scope of the theories in psychology at the time. Hinton compares the theories to a stepladder, which is inadequate for reaching the complexity of human behavior.

Disenchantment with Psychology:
Hinton expresses disappointment with psychology’s naive use of the experimental method to test inadequate theories. He finds the field’s approach ineffective in explaining complex behaviors like the one he observed in the experiment.

Transition to Artificial Intelligence:
Hinton’s disillusionment with psychology leads him to explore artificial intelligence as a more promising field. He recognizes the potential of AI to address the limitations of existing psychological theories and provide better explanations for human behavior.

Early Influences and Chomsky’s Theory of Language:
Hinton’s initial academic pursuits were interrupted by a year of carpentry work. He later became involved in a project studying child language development, influenced by Chomsky’s theory of innate syntactic structures in language.

Exploring Child Language Development:
The project involved observing young children in Bristol and recording their language using radio microphones and tape recorders. Researchers aimed to analyze children’s language samples to understand the acquisition of complex grammatical structures.

Tags as a Window into Grammatical Structures:
Tags, such as “isn’t he” or “aren’t they,” were studied to assess children’s ability to express intricate grammar. One memorable example involved a parent telling a child, “Santa don’t give you no toys if you don’t talk proper, isn’t he?”

Transition to Artificial Intelligence:
Inspired by the potential of artificial intelligence, Hinton pursued a PhD in the field in 1972. He joined the newly established AI center in Edinburgh, which focused on symbolic AI.

Lighthill’s Report and the Symbolic AI Debate:
Sir James Lighthill’s report criticized the symbolic AI approach, arguing that it was inefficient and lacked a solid foundation in how the brain processes information. Lighthill’s analysis sparked controversy within the AI community, with some defending symbolic AI’s capabilities.

The Impact on Hinton’s Career:
As a graduate student during this period, Hinton was influenced by peer pressure to believe in symbolic AI. Following Lighthill’s report, Hinton’s advisor left Edinburgh for Sussex, prompting Hinton to transfer as well.

Navigating the AI Landscape:
Hinton’s experiences shaped his views on AI and led him to question the limitations of symbolic AI. He continued his research in AI, eventually contributing to significant advancements in the field, including deep learning and neural networks.

Advisor and Dissertation Topic:
Geoffrey Hinton’s official advisor was Jim Howe, but it was understood that Hinton would pursue his own interests. Hinton wanted to work on neural networks and how they learned but struggled to find significant improvements over existing knowledge.

Changing Interests:
Hinton’s advisor had previously worked on neural networks but switched to symbolic AI, impressed by Terry Winograd’s thesis using symbolic methods for natural language commands. Despite his advisor’s attempts to persuade him otherwise, Hinton remained stubborn and determined to pursue his interests in neural networks.

Stubbornness and Independence:
Hinton’s advisor recognized his stubbornness and tenacity, traits common among graduate students. An instance is recalled where Hinton’s advisor presented an idea to him, but Hinton politely declined, stating that he had his own ideas to work on.

Tolerance and Understanding:
Hinton’s advisor exhibited tolerance and understanding, respecting Hinton’s independence and allowing him to pursue his own research interests.

Hinton’s Challenging Academic Path:
Hinton’s PhD advisor was tolerant of his unorthodox approach to neural networks, despite constant arguments. Hinton resisted following conventional academic norms, leading to frequent dropouts and career changes. Hinton’s disillusionment with academia prompted him to take a year off and teach in a free school with disturbed children.

The Lighthill Report’s Impact on British AI:
The Lighthill Report’s negative assessment of AI research led to a lack of funding and job opportunities in Britain. This made it difficult for Hinton to secure an academic position in Britain, forcing him to seek opportunities abroad.

The Alluring Opportunity in San Diego:
Hinton was drawn to a postdoc position in San Diego that offered a collaborative environment for understanding the mind. The lack of academic job prospects in Britain, coupled with the Lighthill Report’s impact, left Hinton with limited options.

Hinton’s Encounter with David Rommelhardt in San Diego:
Hinton found common ground with David Rommelhardt, a psychologist interested in understanding how intelligence works in the mind. Rommelhardt’s approach aligned with Hinton’s beliefs about understanding the mind and intelligence. This collaboration marked a significant moment for Hinton, as it was the first time he worked with someone who shared his general perspective.

Backpropagation and Its Reception in Computer Science and Psychology:
After backpropagation was rediscovered by Rommelhardt, Hinton, and others, it sparked initial interest in computer science. However, enthusiasm waned due to limited practical success. In contrast, psychologists remained interested in backpropagation and provided a supportive environment for its exploration.

Hinton’s Focus on Practical Applications and Machine Learning:
While psychologists primarily focused on theoretical aspects, Hinton was interested in using backpropagation to solve practical problems like speech recognition and object recognition. Psychologists generally did not pursue these machine learning applications as vigorously as Hinton.

Hinton’s Acknowledgment of His Solitude but Refusal to be Labeled a Lone Voice:
Hinton recognized that he was relatively isolated in his pursuit of machine learning applications, especially within the computer science community. However, he emphasized that he was not entirely alone, as there were other individuals who shared his vision. He clarified that the wilderness was confined to the field of machine learning, not the entire academic landscape.