Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 115
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
410d
THIS. Read it, understand it, internalize it, look at the picture, and my elaboration and @sapinker’s below that. This fact about current AI is everything, and why current AI simply isn’t up to many the jobs people envision for it.

An entire industry has been built - and will…
7/31/2024, 2:30:52 PM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
410d
👇 The AI world pretty much divides into two groups: those who understand why current machine learning techniques suck at outliers, and therefore struggle at things like driverless cars and high-level reasoning in unusual circumstances — and those who don’t.

Those who don’t have…
Steven Pinker
@sapinker
·
410d
Why Teslas Crash - no sensors, just computer vision, trained by current AI methods, thus clueless on edge cases far outside training set. Quote at 4:03-4:31 could have come from one of my papers w @garymarcus on language in the 1990s. [Though Musk is right that crucial data…

The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the limitations of current AI technologies, particularly in the context of driverless cars and their inability to handle outliers and unusual circumstances. The tone is critical and aims to highlight the shortcomings of existing machine learning techniques. The intent is to inform and provoke thought about the current state and future of AI technologies.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm by focusing on the technical limitations of AI rather than attacking individuals or companies. It aims to raise awareness about potential safety issues, 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 explaining why current AI techniques struggle with outliers and unusual circumstances. It encourages readers to consider the implications of these limitations. [+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 criticism by focusing on the technical aspects of AI and its limitations. It does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+2]
  4. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses its influence to highlight important issues in AI technology, which could lead to better safety standards and improvements in the field. [+2]