Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 118
4/23/2024, 6:20:40 PM
X
In reply to:
Bahaeddin ERAVCI
@bahaeravci
·
263d
@GaryMarcus Curious on what you think about Richard Sutton's pro-scale post from '19. He supports the hypothesis using past data from ML history.
http://www.incompleteideas.net/I…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
263d
13.5 months post GPT-4:

• Models that are not as good as GPT-4 have become widespread.

• Models that are roughly as good GPT-4 have become common.

• Models that are significantly better than GPT-4 don’t exist.

If that doesn’t hint at diminishing returns and potential…
Filip Piekniewski🌻 🐘:@filippie509@techhub.social
@filippie509
·
263d
If the boatload of LLMs available already wasn’t enough for you, here is another one.

Plenty supply, just still don’t see any serious application. Nose bleed valuations. What could go wrong?

The statement in question is a part of a broader conversation about the effectiveness and implications of scaling machine learning models, specifically in the context of AI development. The user expresses an intention to write about why a particular viewpoint is misleading, suggesting a future engagement with the topic that aims to provide a critical perspective. This indicates an engagement with public discourse as it involves a substantive discussion on a significant issue in the field of AI and machine learning.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement intends to clarify or correct what the speaker believes to be a misleading perspective, aiming to prevent misinformation, which aligns with doing no harm. [+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, as it does not involve any personal attacks, harassment, or disclosure of private information. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By aiming to address and correct misleading information, the statement promotes understanding and potentially fosters a more informed public. [+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 speaker indicates a willingness to engage in future dialogue about the topic, suggesting an openness to constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The intention to write about and clarify misleading information in a public discourse context uses influence to potentially better societal understanding of AI development. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech by contributing responsibly to the public discourse on AI, intending to use the platform to spread accurate information. [+1]