Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
9/14/2024, 9:57:13 PM
X
In reply to:
Thomas G. Dietterich
@tdietterich
·
488d
@martin_casado @GaryMarcus That’s not what Tyler said. He was just plain rude.

Gary has taken a lot of flak —seems like the ideas were not universally popular.
martin_casado
@martin_casado
·
488d
@tdietterich @GaryMarcus And I think that’s exactly the point Tyler was making. Which I fully agree with.

It’s not hard to take credit for popular ideas.
martin_casado
@martin_casado
·
488d
@tdietterich @GaryMarcus A huge crowd of us have been saying and writing about this. Some in very exact terms (eg Francois, Vishal Misra, Rohan etc etc ). Gary is pretty unique in claiming credit for high level hand waving on topic where many have done great work … but that’s just the sort of guy he…
Thomas G. Dietterich
@tdietterich
·
488d
@martin_casado Seems to me @GaryMarcus has been right about almost everything related to the limits of LLMs. We are now seeing systems with search, which is something all of us old timers have been waiting for the LLM/AGI crowd to rediscover. Maybe symbolic abstraction is next?
martin_casado
@martin_casado
·
488d
Hahahaha :) cooked

The statement and the preceding conversation constitute public discourse as they engage in a substantive debate about the contributions and accuracy of predictions in the field of AI. The tone of the statement is defensive and seeks clarification and accountability from the other party. The intent appears to be to address perceived unfairness and lack of specific feedback in the ongoing debate.

  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 does express frustration, which could escalate tensions.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects privacy but does call out specific individuals, which could be seen as confrontational. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement seeks understanding and clarification, which aligns with promoting understanding and empathy. [+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 constructive criticism by asking for specifics and clarification, rather than resorting to personal attacks. [+1]