Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47
|
Score 65
6/8/2024, 6:35:16 AM
X
In reply to:
Georgists Against Infill
@ebarcuzzi
·
534d
@GaryMarcus You're an extremely smart guy. And God bless you for being so civil to a Twitter freak too cowardly to post under his own name. But update your priors. Look at where Yann used to agree with you and doesn't now.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
534d
@ebarcuzzi Aside from that, it’s not just that *andrew* didn’t reply; nobody did. And my newsletter gets read by quite a few people, many prominent.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
534d
@ebarcuzzi Pretty I sure I replied to his tweet and he didn’t answer that either. We have been on multiple panels together eg at Davos at AI House; if he can’t be bothered to reply it is not my fault.

In my experience people don’t reply when they don’t have something strong to say.
Georgists Against Infill
@ebarcuzzi
·
534d
@GaryMarcus Andrew Ng ain't gonna read your substack.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
534d
@ebarcuzzi Actually, I think Ng’s argument is very weak, as discussed here: https://garymarcus.substack.com/…

I have not here a response to my counterarguments.
Georgists Against Infill
@ebarcuzzi
·
534d
@GaryMarcus You're posting this because you already saw the serious argument for b.

The statement by @GaryMarcus in response to @ebarcuzzi involves a discussion about the positions of prominent figures in the AI community, specifically regarding large language models (LLMs). The conversation touches on public issues related to AI policy and regulation, making it a part of public discourse. The tone is somewhat defensive and suggests a need for the other party to be better informed before continuing the discussion.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the slightly condescending tone ('You should maybe read some stuff before we continue') could be seen as dismissive.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, and respects the privacy and dignity of others. [+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. Instead, it focuses on defending the speaker's position and suggesting the other party is uninformed. [-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 does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, but it does imply that the other party is not well-informed, which could be seen as dismissive rather than constructive.
  5. 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 and uses the platform to engage in a public issue, though the tone could be more constructive. [+1]