Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 84
11/14/2024, 3:36:46 PM
X
In reply to:
Ethan
@RedRockMoons
·
454d
@daniel_mac8 @emollick @GaryMarcus had argued that he just didn’t think this was the best path, that we may be wasting some time and resources focusing purely on transformers when there may be other viable and potentially better options. He could be right but he just comes across terribly lol 😂 which…
Dan Mac
@daniel_mac8
·
455d
@emollick I don’t understand the psychology behind wanting to be right about these pessimistic predictions

is it just the desire to say “told you so”?
Ethan Mollick
@emollick
·
455d
Really think the speculation about an “end of scaling” seems very premature given (1) AI lab insiders are mostly universally bullish on scaling and (2) scaling inference works & has barely been exploited… but also a more linear improvement path for AI would still be disruptive

The statement is part of a public discourse on the topic of AI development and the debate over the effectiveness of scaling in AI models. The tone is defensive and accusatory, suggesting frustration with perceived intellectual dishonesty in the discussion.

  1. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement accuses others of being intellectually dishonest, which can be seen as a form of disrespect and could border on harassment if not substantiated. [-1]
  2. 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. Instead, it resorts to a personal attack by labeling others as intellectually dishonest without providing evidence or engaging with their arguments. [-2]