Gary Marcus

Rank 32 of 47
|
Score -1
6/20/2024, 9:21:51 PM
X
In reply to:
gabe
@gabequalia
·
149d
@GaryMarcus @tahagngr86 the difference between me and you is that i am self aware enough to understand that i am irrelevant

for these people it’s not worth the time for them
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
149d
@tahagngr86 @gabequalia Hinton has 3 quotes from on his web page and regularly mentions me in his talks. has he *ever* mentioned either of you bozos?

Fridman had me on his pod. How about you? which episode?

Lecun wrote an article and hundreds of tweets above me, You?

musk took a potshot at me,…
e/acc
@tahagngr86
·
149d
@gabequalia @GaryMarcus Exactly, such a boomer!
gabe
@gabequalia
·
149d
@GaryMarcus i don’t think it’s about nerve, they simply realize you’re irrelevant to debate
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
149d
Talk is cheap; Twitter potshots are cheap.

Standing in front of moderator in a formal debate with the world watching is not.

I have invited most of the major LLM enthusiasts from Musk to Kurzweil to Altman to Hinton debate; not one has had the nerve.
Christian Contemplation is the Bee’s Knees
@JoshBranscomb
·
149d
@GaryMarcus @lexfridman Anyone aware of recent, public, recorded debates on what LLMs will likely achieve? I'm not looking for safety debates. I'm looking for debates as to LLM capability, now and going forward.

The statement 'I just got gave you lots of evidence that they actually care. Sending you to mute for ignoring it.' is part of a broader conversation about the relevance and recognition of individuals in the context of debates on LLMs (Large Language Models). The tone is dismissive and somewhat confrontational, indicating frustration with the other party's perceived ignorance or dismissal of provided evidence.

  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 dismissive and punitive, which can be harmful. [-1]
  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; it engages in a form of cyberbullying by muting the other party for ignoring evidence. [-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; it resorts to a personal attack by muting the other party instead of continuing the discussion. [-2]