Gary Marcus

Rank 35 of 47
|
Score -20
7/23/2024, 4:36:10 PM
X
In reply to:
Jason Gu
@jasonprompts
·
105d
@GaryMarcus What? Claude Sonnett 3.5 is handily beating GPT-4, now Llama is as well.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
105d
@jasonprompts not shown it the fact that nobody has markedly beaten gpt-4 in two years of trying
Jason Gu
@jasonprompts
·
105d
@GaryMarcus more tokens + more GPUs = more smart
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
105d
LLaMa 3 450B is huge. Here’s why:
– Roughly as good as GPT-4, but open source.
- There goes OpenAI’s business model
- But it’s not GPT-5 level either, despite truly massive resources.
- Sure looks deep learning is hitting a wall, pending some kind of new breakthrough. Synthetic…
Marco Mascorro @ ICML 2024
@Mascobot
·
105d
LLaMa 3.1 benchmarks side by side.

This is truly a SOTA model.

Beats GPT4 almost on every single benchmark.

Continuously trained with a 128K context length.

Pre-trained on 15.6T tokens (405B).

The fine-tuning data includes publicly available instruction datasets, as well as…

The statement '@jasonprompts tiny increments. nothing like 4 vs 3 or 3 vs 2 and you know it. disagree? prove it.' is part of a public discourse on the performance of different AI models. The tone is confrontational and challenges the previous claim made by @jasonprompts. The intent is to dispute the assertion that Claude Sonnett 3.5 is outperforming GPT-4 and to demand evidence for such a claim.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but is confrontational, which could escalate tensions. [-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 as it is somewhat dismissive and challenging in a confrontational manner. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, it challenges the other party to prove their point, which can be seen as combative. [-1]
  4. 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 challenges the other party without providing a counter-argument or evidence. [-1]