Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
3/19/2024, 1:12:35 AM
X
In reply to:
Moonlit Monkey
@MoonlitMonkey69
·
672d
@mmbronstein @tegmark @ylecun @GaryMarcus @geoffreyhinton @sama How many are experts in human cognition?
Michael Bronstein
@mmbronstein
·
673d
@tegmark @ylecun @GaryMarcus @geoffreyhinton @sama only a subset of these are actually people who do AI research, others are businessmen whose opinion is shaped by financial interest
Max Tegmark
@tegmark
·
673d
Top AI leaders strongly disagree on when AI will overtake human Intelligence. 2 or 100 years – what do *you* think? @ylecun @GaryMarcus @geoffreyhinton @sama https://www.improvethenews.org/c…

The statement criticizes the perceived lack of respect for expertise in human cognition within the AI field and predicts negative historical judgment on this attitude. It is part of a broader discussion on the timeline for AI to surpass human intelligence, a significant public issue.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement implies harm through intellectual arrogance but does not directly cause harm with words or actions. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others, with no evidence of cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks a tone of understanding, empathy, or compassion, focusing instead on criticism. [-1]
  4. 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 criticism but does not engage in constructive dialogue or avoid personal attacks. [-1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement aims to use influence to correct what the speaker sees as a misstep in the field, which could be for the betterment of society if it leads to more interdisciplinary respect and collaboration. [+1]