Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
12/21/2024, 12:59:03 PM
X
In reply to:
Dianne Whitehead
@diannew314159
·
197d
@TheMysteryDrop @GaryMarcus Wow, that's deep. 🤦‍♀️
MindMirror
@TheMysteryDrop
·
197d
@GaryMarcus They will be wrong until they are right.
You will be correct until you are wrong.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
197d
How many times do we have to see this same movie, where an AI beats some benchmark and influencers gleefully shout “It’s So Over” without even trying out the AI and then on careful inspection the AI turns out to not be robust or reliable?

Thousands?

(It’s already been…

The statement engages in a discussion about the future of AI technology, specifically the debate between neurosymbolic AI and pure large language models (LLMs). It reflects on the potential correctness of a particular stance within the AI field, suggesting a divide in opinion among experts.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but implies a competitive stance, which could be seen as dismissive of others' views.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it focuses on being right rather than fostering dialogue. [-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 a form of constructive criticism by participating in a debate about AI methodologies, but it leans towards a personal assertion of correctness rather than open dialogue.