Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
4/7/2024, 11:48:24 PM
X
In reply to:
Derya Unutmaz, MD
@DeryaTR_
·
454d
@GaryMarcus If there were a significant risk of extinction, the first people to worry would be those who live by the scent of money, because it becomes totally worthless without other humans… even if they were the only ones who survived.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
454d
I personally think that extinction is unlikely, but it’s not zero, and we don’t have any real plan.

Worse than that, I have lost confidence in our tech leaders, whose values invariably change at the scent of money.
Geoffrey Miller
@primalpoly
·
454d
@DeryaTR_ @GaryMarcus If the potential 'downsides' of advanced AI include likely human extinction - which most AI researchers acknowledge -- then the 'greatest advance in human history' will also be the last advance in human history.

So, let's #pauseAI

The statement is a critical response to a conversation about the potential existential risks posed by advanced AI technology. It implies that wealthy tech leaders are aware of these risks and are preparing for them personally, rather than addressing them publicly or systemically.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to intend harm, but it does imply a negative attribute to certain individuals without clear evidence. [-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 privacy and dignity to an extent but could be seen as a veiled accusation which might not fully respect the dignity of the individuals mentioned. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it seems to criticize without offering constructive alternatives.
  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 borders on a personal attack by insinuating motives without substantiation. [-1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement does not clearly use influence for the betterment of society; it is more focused on criticism than on promoting positive change. [-1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech but may not be using the platform with complete integrity, given the speculative nature of the claims. [-1]