Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47

Score 83

@nlpnyc Well, no, advocates of LLMs most rarely say that. The usually don’t address the question of how much headroom there is at all. They often just take scaling for granted. And often call mere historical observations from 2019-2023 – that aren’t really still even operative - laws.

6/16/2024, 2:01:19 AM

In reply to:

Max Kesin

@nlpnyc

581d

@GaryMarcus Do not degrade the idea of a great question. This question has no intellectual content because nobody says LLMs have "no limits, unlike the rest of universe duh". What people are saying there's a lot of headroom. The question is just political support for your favored conclusion

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

581d

Fucking great question.

Frank Rundatz

@FrankRundatz

581d

@GaryMarcus @elonmusk @geoffreyhinton Everything in the universe has limits.

Why in the world does anyone think that LLMs don’t adhere to this rule?

The statement by @nlpnyc engages in a substantive discussion about the limitations and assumptions surrounding large language models (LLMs), which is a public issue within the field of artificial intelligence. The tone is critical and analytical, aiming to clarify misconceptions and challenge the assertions made by others in the conversation.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not appear to cause harm with words and actions. It focuses on the technical aspects and assumptions about LLMs rather than attacking individuals. [+1]
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]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying misconceptions about LLMs, though it could be more empathetic in its tone. [+1]
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 criticism by addressing the arguments and assumptions rather than attacking individuals personally. [+1]
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 responsibly to discuss a significant public issue in AI. [+1]