Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
7/29/2024, 3:19:08 PM
X
In reply to:
davidad 🎇
@davidad
·
339d
@GaryMarcus Yes, you have been right on the essential points for decades!
But—a lot of folk have been reading you for the past year as predicting a coming AI winter.
This new post exhibits a change in emphasis toward the positive, apparently related to the demonstrated success of AlphaProof.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
339d
@davidad this is a bit confused.
- I have been cheering for neurosymbolic all along
- the whole point of my critiques (2001, 2012, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022) has ALWAYS been in part we needed neurosymbolic hybrids (which include deep learning as a component) to move past the limits of pure…
davidad 🎇
@davidad
·
339d
“Deep learning is hitting a wall” is hitting a wall; even Gary Marcus is (correctly) hopeful about a coming wave of neurosymbolic systems, like AlphaProof, that use deep RL to guide formal methods.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
340d
The future of AI is neurosymbolic.

#longread about @GoogleDeepMind’s new work (cc: @demishassabis) that is easily the most positive and important essay I have written this year.

If you care about what happens in AI after the generative AI bubble bursts, please have a look.

The statement by @davidad predicting a possible AI winter unless a change in direction is made quickly enough constitutes public discourse. It engages with the ongoing debate about the future of AI, specifically the potential for an 'AI winter' and the need for a shift towards neurosymbolic systems. The tone is cautionary and forward-looking, aiming to influence the direction of AI research and development.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm by warning of potential negative outcomes (an AI winter) and suggesting a proactive change in direction. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding and empathy by acknowledging the concerns about the future of AI and suggesting a constructive path forward. [+1]
  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 responding to previous comments and contributing to the discussion with a reasoned prediction and recommendation. [+1]
  4. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses the platform to influence the betterment of society by advocating for a strategic shift in AI research to avoid potential setbacks. [+1]