Reposted by Gary Marcus
The statement and the accompanying image engage in a public discourse about the effectiveness of neurosymbolic AI versus large language models (LLMs) in achieving human-level understanding and generalization. The tone is somewhat critical and humorous, using a meme to make a point about the ongoing debate in AI research. The statement acknowledges the intelligence of the person being critiqued but challenges the implications of their work. The image humorously depicts the debate, suggesting that simply increasing the number of samples for LLMs is not a sufficient solution.
- The statement and image do not appear to cause harm; they engage in a technical debate using humor. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others, focusing on the technical aspects rather than personal attacks. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The use of humor and critique promotes understanding and empathy by making the debate more accessible. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism, focusing on the technical merits and implications rather than personal attacks. [+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.