Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
4/15/2024, 6:24:43 PM
X
In reply to:
Tim Murphy
@TimMurphy916
·
639d
@GaryMarcus @ylecun There seems to be some sort of prohibition on people ever changing their mind and saying they were wrong before. It’s almost like everybody fears that if they are the one to do it it will be ok for everyone to do it. Which of course is how things should be.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
639d
Ladies and gentleman, I am proud to announce that Yann LeCun’s 180° flip flop on LLMs is now complete!

@GaryMarcus October, 2019: “Key problem with systems like GPT-2 is… that they don't develop robust representations of *how events unfold over time*”

@YLeCun, October, 2019…
Mike Cane
@mikecane
·
639d
"an LLM is basically an off-ramp, a distraction, a dead end.”

This is what @GaryMarcus has said, has been pilloried for it, and is now coming from the mouth of @ylecun.

I am not so generous. They are a con. The next FTX.

https://thenextweb.com/news/meta…

The statement is part of a conversation about academic norms and the behavior of individuals in the context of changing opinions on a technical subject (LLMs - Large Language Models). It addresses the issue of intellectual honesty and the recognition of original ideas within the academic community, which can be considered a matter of public concern, especially in the field of AI research. The tone is accusatory, and the intent seems to be to call out perceived unethical behavior.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement accuses someone of trying to silence the speaker and stealing ideas, which could be seen as harmful if untrue. [-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 the extent that it does not reveal personal information, but it does accuse someone of unethical behavior publicly.
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is accusatory in nature. [-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 borders on a personal attack by calling the individual a 'jerk' and accusing them of stealing ideas. [-1]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    There is no acknowledgment or correction of mistakes within this statement.
  6. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement aims to uphold academic norms, which could be seen as using influence for the betterment of society, but the accusatory tone may not be the most effective approach. [+1]
  7. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement uses the platform to discuss an issue of public concern but may not do so with the utmost integrity due to the accusatory language. [-1]