Gary Marcus

Rank 24 of 47
|
Score 10
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
419d
crazy update, just a few hours later:
9/26/2024, 1:12:40 AM
X
In reply to:
Dileep George
@dileeplearning
·
419d
@GaryMarcus @AlexTensor Gary, those folks have been there for long time. Startups are chaos engines and churn is normal. They are still shipping innovative things and executing fast. The rest is all side show.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
419d
Wait what? Murati is leaving, Schulman left, Karpathy left, Ilya left, Leike left, Brockman is on leave, perhaps a dozen others left, GPT-5 hasn’t dropped, Sora hasn’t shipped, the company had an operating loss of $5b last year, there is no obvious moat, Meta is giving away…
Mira Murati
@miramurati
·
419d
I shared the following note with the OpenAI team today.

The statement 'totally normal' by @AlexTensor in response to @dileeplearning's comment on @GaryMarcus's concerns about the departures at OpenAI constitutes public discourse. It engages in a discussion about the stability and operational dynamics of a significant company in the AI industry, which is a matter of public interest.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement 'totally normal' seems to downplay the concerns raised by @GaryMarcus about the departures at OpenAI. While it does not directly cause harm, it could be seen as dismissive of legitimate concerns, which might indirectly contribute to a lack of transparency or accountability. [-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. It maintains a neutral tone and does not attack any individual personally.
  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 dismisses the concerns without providing any substantial reasoning or evidence, which could hinder constructive dialogue. [-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 does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. It dismisses the concerns raised without addressing them substantively, which could be seen as a form of ad hominem argument by implying that the concerns are not valid without providing a counter-argument. [-1]