Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47

|

Score 64

+3

@DeryaTR_ Disappointing. That is NOT an answer to my point that almost everyone misread your post, because the most important information (year) was cropped/not mentioned clearly in your post.

10/3/2024, 2:39:32 PM

In reply to:

Derya Unutmaz, MD

@DeryaTR_

·

279d

@GaryMarcus As I said I made offer to save you from stress waiting another year, you don’t have to concede; you can actually raise it 10x or 20x if you like!

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

·

279d

@DeryaTR_ What makes it really misleading is that you don’t mention 2025 and the only reference to that is not visible unless one clicks and zooms in the right hand tweet and reads very carefully.

As is apparent from the comments, very few people did that.

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

·

279d

@DeryaTR_ It is very unfortunate that your post is super misleading to most people, because was the bet re the end of *2025* but most people won’t get that from your post, unless they read the screenshots super carefully.

The point is that WeWork went up and up until it abruptly…

Derya Unutmaz, MD

@DeryaTR_

·

279d

Hey Gary @GaryMarcus, do you want to concede on our bet? 😊 Just admitting that you were wrong would be enough 😎

Alternatively, we could raise it 10x — I’m in! 😇

The statement addresses a misunderstanding in a public discussion about a bet related to AI predictions. It critiques the lack of clarity in a previous post, which led to misinterpretation by the audience.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement aims to clarify a misunderstanding, which aligns with striving to do no harm by promoting accurate information. [+1]
Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
It respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the content of the post rather than personal attacks. [+1]
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 pointing out the issue with the original post's clarity without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]