Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
5/20/2024, 9:11:01 PM
X
In reply to:
CK
@seaspinner
·
618d
@GaryMarcus @gdb I know they need those engineers. I was commenting that it isn't the only communication problem they need to deal with, but I didn't mean to imply that Greg Brockman's post there was the misstep. I meant the chatbot voice & PR mess. I guess I flubbed that communication. Sorry.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
618d
@seaspinner @gdb i think they are taking us for fools, communicationwise. but the job listing seems reasonable for what they are trying to accomplish, no? minimizing latency for the model etc?
CK
@seaspinner
·
618d
@GaryMarcus Another day, another example of OpenAI damaging their own credibility & reputation. I saw @gdb post an ad for real-time communications engineers. The communications they're having the most trouble with are between their bubble & the rest of the planet. One misstep after another.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
618d
Total f’cking coincidence.

The statement in question is a reply within a broader conversation about OpenAI's communication issues and a specific incident involving a voice in ChatGPT. The conversation touches on public concerns about OpenAI's credibility and communication strategies, making it part of public discourse. The reply itself is neutral and agrees with the previous statement, adding no new information or critique.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does no harm and is neutral in tone, aligning with the principle of striving to do 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 engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding and empathy by agreeing with the previous comment, though it does not add substantial value to the discussion.
  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 constructive dialogue by agreeing with the previous comment, but it does not provide any new insights or constructive criticism.