Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
5/6/2024, 3:47:25 PM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
426d
@Anuiran they haven’t changed much since the last time i tried; they remain unreliable and unpredictable and i don’t feel obligated to master prompt contorition when i think they are a detour.
Jeremy Meisnitzer
@Anuiran
·
426d
@GaryMarcus This is an insane revelation about you, not sure I can take you all that seriously on the topic of LLMs anymore.

You are really speed running flanderization, that’s the best way I can sum up (my perceived) stance on your role in world of AI.

Person who does not use thing says..
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
427d
Encouraged by a friend I tried out some LLMs this weekend, first time in a while.

They are just so erratic; hardly anything feels replicable, within or between models.

How anyone is supposed to engineer real-world solutions on that foundation, I really don’t know.

The statement by @Anuiran in response to @GaryMarcus's critique of LLMs (Large Language Models) constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about the reliability and development of AI technologies, which are significant in the context of societal and technological advancements.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm but lacks a constructive approach.
  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 does not engage in harassment or hate speech. [+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, focusing instead on a dismissive tone towards opposing views. [-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 dialogue but leans towards a dismissive rather than a constructive criticism, slightly violating this principle. [-1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement indirectly uses influence to discuss AI technology, but it could better promote societal betterment by being more constructive and open to differing viewpoints.