Gary Marcus

Rank 24 of 47
|
Score 8
6/14/2024, 3:19:41 PM
X
In reply to:
Tess Hegarty
@thegartsy
·
522d
@GaryMarcus I admit I am confused by this. Have you used models like this yourself and seen how good they are already? This seems totally unrepresentative of their current capabilities, in a way that seems like harmful rationalization of a specific narrative.

Generative AI is already…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
522d
The GenAI trainwreck below captures everything that is both good and deficient about current AI.
- The graphics are stunningly photorealistic, far beyond what was achievable a couple years ago.
- Yet the physiology, even for something as common as the human body, is completely…
Diario de un picateclas
@devruso
·
522d
hasta sería gracioso de no ser porque @DotCSV es precisamente quien más hype ha estado metiendo estos 2 años con las míticas frases como “y de aquí solo va a mejorar!!”.

@GaryMarcus siempre tuvo razón. meter más datos y más gpus no está dando mejores resultados

The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the capabilities and limitations of generative AI models, specifically addressing the reliability and performance of these models. The tone is analytical and aims to contribute to the ongoing debate about the effectiveness and potential of AI technologies.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is focused on providing a personal experience with the AI model, which aligns with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by sharing personal experiences with the AI model, contributing to a more nuanced discussion about its capabilities and limitations. [+1]
  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 engages in constructive dialogue by addressing a specific point in the conversation and providing a personal perspective, without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]