Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 89
3/15/2024, 6:39:43 PM
X
In reply to:
henry 🌘
@hdevalence
·
572d
@GaryMarcus @patmcguinness this reply understands you perfectly well, they just don’t agree with you.

are you unable to tell the difference?
Dr Patrick M. - AI Builder
@patmcguinness
·
572d
@GaryMarcus (a) is imho falsely premised. LLMs have no more GIGO factor than search engines that surface a flat earth blog.
(b) while tenable, LLMs are not nearly as capable of 'fake news' spreading as we humans armed with social media.
No wonder E/Acc 'won'. Let's set premises better.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
572d
@hdevalence @patmcguinness or at least you’d be able to understand what a thought experiment was, i would hope
henry 🌘
@hdevalence
·
572d
@GaryMarcus @patmcguinness my god, if only i had taken more undergrad philosophy classes, i would be able to uncritically accept someone else’s incorrect problem framing
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
572d
@patmcguinness my god you people are bad at thought experiments stated in the most plainly conditional ways.

don’t know how to help you. maybe take an undergrad philosophy class?
Dr Patrick M. - AI Builder
@patmcguinness
·
572d
@GaryMarcus (a) is imho falsely premised. LLMs have no more GIGO factor than search engines that surface a flat earth blog.
(b) while tenable, LLMs are not nearly as capable of 'fake news' spreading as we humans armed with social media.
No wonder E/Acc 'won'. Let's set premises better.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
572d
Conditions under which you would ban LLMs
a. If they completely polluted the information ecosphere and undermined science
b. If they completely polluted the information ecosphere and undermined democracy
c. Other (specify)
d. None, I am e/acc. Damn the consequences.

The statement is part of a discussion on thought experiments and their premises. The tone is instructive, aiming to clarify the nature of thought experiments and how to engage with them. The content is focused on the process of hypothetical reasoning rather than personal attacks or sensitive topics.

  1. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by explaining how to properly engage with thought experiments, which fosters empathy and compassion in discourse. [+1]
  2. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by pointing out a misunderstanding in the discourse and explaining the correct approach to thought experiments. [+1]