Gary Marcus

Rank 28 of 47
|
Score 14
8/2/2024, 2:26:26 PM
X
In reply to:
Lil Byte
@lilbytelil
·
88d
@GaryMarcus Do you think none of the massive sums invested have made their way to alternative architectures?

I assumed that all the money pouring in was likely accelerating our exploration of new architectures.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
88d
We in the West could truly be screwed if this happens.

Whoever pivots first may well win.
Biluzeira
@Biluzeira911
·
88d
@GaryMarcus What are the odds that China sees the huge sums o capital wasted on LLMs and pivot sooner to a better architecture??

The statement '@lilbytelil more likely hurting the exploration of others by diverting resources and talent' constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about the allocation of resources and talent in the field of AI development, which is a public issue. The tone is critical, and the intent appears to be to challenge the notion that current investments are beneficial for exploring new architectures.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause direct harm with words and actions, but it is critical and could be seen as dismissive of the efforts of others. This is a minor violation. [-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 engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It respects the privacy and dignity of others.
  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. It is critical without offering constructive alternatives. This is a minor violation. [-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 engages in criticism but does not provide constructive dialogue or evidence to support its claim. It does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, but the criticism is not constructive. This is a minor violation. [-1]