Gary Marcus

Rank 35 of 47
|
Score -20
6/23/2024, 7:45:27 PM
X
In reply to:
Nick Moran
@NickEMoran
·
135d
@GaryMarcus @garrytan @ycombinator The requirements are impossible to comply with, and so any open-source covered model developer will necessarily either not open source their model, or will commit perjury by falsely certifying that they meet the impossible standard.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
136d
Hey @garrytan @ycombinator your letter on California’s AI regulation seems awfully sensationalist and alarmist to me. Have I missed something?

You say “AI software developers could go to jail simply for failing to anticipate misuse of their software–a standard of product…
Garry Tan
@garrytan
·
137d
SB1047 is not the right path.

This bill, as it stands, could gravely harm California’s ability to retain its AI talent and remain the location of choice for AI companies. We hope Sen. Wiener chooses a path that protects startups and open source AI.

https://www.politico.com/newslet…

The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages substantively with a public issue, specifically the debate around California’s AI regulation (SB1047) and its implications for AI developers and open-source models. The tone is inquisitive and seeks clarification, aiming to foster a deeper understanding of the issue at hand.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It asks for specific information and clarification, which is a constructive approach. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by asking for specific details and comparisons to other industries, which can help clarify the issue for all parties involved. [+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 engages in constructive dialogue by asking for specifics rather than making personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+2]