Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47
|
Score 79
9/14/2024, 12:08:42 AM
X
In reply to:
tylercowen
@tylercowen
·
349d
@GaryMarcus You've been on a losing streak as of late.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
349d
@tylercowen Show me one of my predictions that has failed, aside from the specific test of the Winograd schema. I can given you dozens that have held strong for 20 years, almost with their origin in an understanding of distribution shift.
tylercowen
@tylercowen
·
349d
@GaryMarcus I observe that many people think they understand the term better than they do, and they use it to justify unduly pessimistic predictions that mostly have failed.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
349d
@tylercowen I don’t think you understand the term.
tylercowen
@tylercowen
·
349d
I too fail to reason "out of distribution," and that is one reason to try to read a lot, travel a lot, movies, and so on.

The statement 'That is so empty it’s beneath you. Given me actual things I said, with quotes or sources, that have been proven wrong.' is part of a public discourse involving a debate on the accuracy of predictions and understanding of a specific term. The tone is confrontational and defensive, aiming to challenge the previous assertion made by Tyler Cowen.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but uses a confrontational tone that could escalate the argument. It neither significantly upholds nor violates this principle.
  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 to a reasonable extent. [+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 defending the speaker's position and challenging the opponent. [-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 a form of constructive criticism by asking for specific evidence to support the claim. However, the phrase 'That is so empty it’s beneath you' can be seen as a personal attack, which detracts from constructive dialogue. [-1]