Gary Marcus

Rank 18 of 47
|
Score 55
6/12/2024, 9:13:38 PM
X
In reply to:
grsimari
@grsimari
·
527d
@ylecun @cyberSM7 Are you sure you do grasp the idea? There are so many ways of combining both areas that it's difficult for me to believe that you're capable of considering all of them and discard the possibility. But, who am I, a mere mortal, to question you? @GaryMarcus @pascalhitzler
Yann LeCun
@ylecun
·
530d
@cyberSM7 Very skeptical, to say the least.
You can't make logical reasoning compatible with gradient-based learning because it's discrete and non differentiable.

My proposals for reasoning and planning are based on gradient-based optimization.
SumTrader
@cyberSM7
·
531d
@ylecun What are your thoughts on neurosymbolic AI?
Yann LeCun
@ylecun
·
531d
@AvpElk @headinthebox LLMs are decoder-only transformer architectures trained purely from text or other sequences of discrete tokens to predict the next token (or tokens) in a sequence. They are used to generate token sequences in an auto-regressive fashion.
There are many, many other ways to build…
AVP
@AvpElk
·
531d
@ylecun @headinthebox Curious where you draw the line between “LLM” and “not-LLM”
Yann LeCun
@ylecun
·
531d
@headinthebox You don't seem to understand the difference between product-focused technology development and longer-term research toward the next generation AI systems.
I'm specifically talking about the latter.

At Meta, the former is in the hands of the GenAI organization.
The latter in the…

The statement in question is a reply within a broader conversation about AI and neurosymbolic AI, which are substantive public issues. Therefore, it constitutes public discourse. The tone of the statement is confrontational and dismissive, particularly towards LeCun, and it includes a request for a screenshot to potentially mock or criticize LeCun further.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not strive to do no harm; it is confrontational and could be seen as an attempt to publicly shame or ridicule LeCun. (-2 points) [-2]
  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 respect the dignity of others and could be seen as engaging in cyberbullying or harassment by calling LeCun 'childish' and requesting a screenshot to further the mockery. (-2 points) [-2]
  3. 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 constructive criticism or dialogue. Instead, it resorts to a personal attack by calling LeCun 'childish,' which is an ad hominem argument. (-2 points) [-2]