Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 59
12/21/2024, 6:45:08 PM
X
In reply to:
bradstradamus
@bradstradamus
·
211d
@GaryMarcus @Miles_Brundage @metaculus 1M even money? good on ya! hard to agree on specific goalposts though
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
211d
@bradstradamus @Miles_Brundage @metaculus i offered Elon $1M re end of 2025.

he didn’t take it.

miles is vague and i want to know if he means what he said.
bradstradamus
@bradstradamus
·
211d
@GaryMarcus @Miles_Brundage @metaculus we need more bets like this, you love to see skin in the game. tho considering the volume of your certainty, gary, i think you should be offering him way better odds
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
211d
What odds will give you me on that @Miles_Brundage? 19 to 1, if it is almost certain? My $10,000 versus your $190k?

Do you really believe this? What’s “few years”? All humans? Some humans?

Can we put this on @metaculus?
Miles Brundage
@Miles_Brundage
·
212d
In my new blog post, I share a starter pack for feeling the AGI: resources and arguments indicating that AI is virtually certain to exceed human performance in most areas in the next few years, and that the time to act is now.

The conversation revolves around the potential of AI to exceed human performance and the implications for policy, which constitutes public discourse. The discussion includes a challenge to substantiate claims with specific criteria and bets, indicating a debate on the certainty and impact of AI advancements.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The conversation does not appear to cause harm, as it is a debate on AI predictions.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The discussion promotes understanding by challenging claims and seeking clarity on AI predictions. [+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 conversation engages in constructive criticism by questioning the certainty of AI predictions and suggesting bets to test beliefs. [+1]