Gary Marcus

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 48
9/12/2024, 6:22:18 PM
X
In reply to:
Eli⭐
@RootieDaHoodie
·
271d
@GaryMarcus @polynoamial You claim my comment "annihilates" none of your talking points, yet you fail to refute any specific part of it.

My reply was directly addressing your concerns about AI capabilities and the potential misinterpretation of OpenAI's claims.
Eli⭐
@RootieDaHoodie
·
271d
@GaryMarcus @polynoamial Gary, your reaction seems more like an avoidance than a rebuttal. If my points don’t hit home, it might be worth reconsidering their validity instead of silencing the discussion.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
271d
@RootieDaHoodie @polynoamial In no way does it that. Not even one of them.

It’s people like you with an empty, unspecific blustering comments that make me want to turn off comments for randos.
Eli⭐
@RootieDaHoodie
·
271d
@GaryMarcus @polynoamial It rubs you the wrong way because it completely annihilates all your talking points.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
271d
Dear @polynoamial of OpenAI, re your new o1 model,

I really like a lot of your work, but tweet below rubs me the wrong way, because it invites the inference that running versions of o1 for weeks or months might create a new cancer drug (in reality, at best you just get new…
Noam Brown
@polynoamial
·
271d
@OpenAI @rao2z @OpenAI's o1 thinks for seconds, but we aim for future versions to think for hours, days, even weeks. Inference costs will be higher, but what cost would you pay for a new cancer drug? For breakthrough batteries? For a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis? AI can be more than chatbots

The statement by @RootieDaHoodie constitutes public discourse as it engages in a debate about AI capabilities and the interpretation of OpenAI's claims. The tone is confrontational and dismissive, and it includes a threat to mute the other participant if their response is not satisfactory.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not strive to do no harm; it is dismissive and includes a threat to mute the other participant, which can be seen as harmful and silencing. [-2]
  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; it is dismissive and includes a threat, which can be seen as a form of harassment. [-2]
  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 confrontational and dismissive. [-2]
  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 includes a threat to mute the other participant, which is a form of personal attack. [-2]