Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
9/15/2024, 1:40:37 PM
X
In reply to:
Tamay Besiroglu
@tamaybes
·
490d
@GaryMarcus @tylercowen You wrote in 2022 that “we are still a long way from machines that can genuinely understand human language”(https://nautil.us/deep-learning-… ). This turned out to be false.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
491d
@tylercowen That is so empty it’s beneath you. Given me actual things I said, with quotes or sources, that have been proven wrong.
tylercowen
@tylercowen
·
491d
@GaryMarcus You've been on a losing streak as of late.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
491d
@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
·
491d
@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
·
491d
@tylercowen I don’t think you understand the term.

The statement by @GaryMarcus constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive debate about the progress and limitations of artificial intelligence, a significant public issue. The tone is assertive and defensive, aiming to refute criticism and uphold the author's previous claims. The intent is to defend the author's position on AI development and challenge the opposing viewpoint.

  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 confrontational tone 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 does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does involve a public disagreement that could be perceived as disrespectful.
  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 a position. [-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 dialogue but is somewhat confrontational and dismissive, which could be seen as a personal attack rather than constructive criticism. [-1]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The statement does not acknowledge any mistakes and instead doubles down on the original position. [-1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principle of free speech and uses the platform to engage in a public debate, though the tone could be more respectful. [+1]