Gary Marcus

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 51
12/21/2024, 12:00:19 AM
X
In reply to:
Brydon Eastman
@brhydon
·
193d
@GaryMarcus From my reading this is a substantial update to your point 5. Ofc this isn't a whole picture, but certainly it seems bad faith to not call this a major progress upon that axis towards AGI? And demonstrably the largest update along that axis an LLM has taken
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
193d
@brhydon i didn’t personally hitch myself to that wagon. you can see my criteria here: https://garymarcus.substack.com/…
Brydon Eastman
@brhydon
·
193d
@GaryMarcus Research is a winding road and some unexpected paths can spring out of no where and prove to bear incredible fruit.

Standards have only fallen if you're centred primarily around products. Centering oneself around progress is far more rewarding.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
193d
After almost two years of declaring that a release of GPT-5 is imminent and not getting it, super fans have decided that a demo of system that they did zero personal experimentation with — and that won’t (in full form) be available for months — is a mic-drop AGI moment.…

The conversation involves a discussion on the progress of AI towards achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI), specifically addressing the ability of AI to handle mathematical proofs. The tone is analytical and somewhat skeptical, with a focus on evaluating claims of progress in AI capabilities.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is focused on a technical evaluation of AI progress. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by engaging in a discussion about the realistic capabilities of AI. [+1]
  3. 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, questioning the validity of claims about AI progress without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]