Gary Marcus

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 52
9/6/2024, 9:01:35 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Gruen
@Michaelgr1011
·
349d
@GaryMarcus @MarioNawfal so you’re saying sociologically it’s possible to occur, but the logic he explains is less plausible within the timeframe he gives?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
349d
@Michaelgr1011 @MarioNawfal That’s partly a sociological question of how much error we are willing to accept. Doing it reliably is certainly far more than a decade away.
Michael Gruen
@Michaelgr1011
·
349d
@MarioNawfal @GaryMarcus i assume you disagree with this timeline. what do you think is realistic?
Mario Nawfal
@MarioNawfal
·
349d
🚨YUVAL NOAH HARARI: IN 10 YEARS, AIs WILL BE RUNNING THE WORLD

“I'm not having in mind some kind of Hollywoodian science fiction scenario of 1 big computer kind of conquering the world.

It's more like a bureaucracy of AIs that we will have millions of AI bureaucrats…

The statement in question is part of a broader conversation about the future impact of AI on society, which constitutes public discourse. The tone is somewhat dismissive and uses informal language ('shitty AI'), but it engages with the topic of AI's capabilities and timelines, which are public concerns.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the use of 'shitty AI' could be seen as unprofessional or dismissive, which might indirectly harm the quality of the discourse. [-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, and it respects the privacy and dignity of others. [+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. It is more focused on a technical critique.
  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 personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It is a technical critique, albeit in informal language. [+1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech but could be seen as not using the platform as responsibly as possible due to the informal and somewhat dismissive language.