Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
12/22/2024, 1:23:35 AM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
375d
@KettlebellDan I was definitely wrong on THAT prediction (but thought we were talking AI).
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
375d
@GaryMarcus as an EE I'm pretty good with logic

you clearly predicted Trump would lose
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
375d
@KettlebellDan We discussed that one before, and I guess you are rusty on how the logic of implications work.
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
375d
@GaryMarcus
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
424d
If Harris wins, a lot of people will have to ask themselves, “what exactly am I getting out of X, other than propaganda?”
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
375d
@KettlebellDan Which? I keep asking people for documentation and they never give any.

I was wrong about winograd schemas and OpenAI valuations and not a lot else that I know of.
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
375d
@GaryMarcus I’ve never accused you of moving goalposts, but you seem to employ the technique of making a lot of predictions and then claiming the ones that come true and letting the rest fall to obscurity

The statement is part of a public discourse involving a debate on the accuracy and logic of predictions made by public figures, which touches on broader issues of accountability and transparency in public statements.

  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 a critique of another's logic without resorting to personal attacks, maintaining a focus on the content of the argument. [+1]
  2. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The statement does not acknowledge any mistakes on the part of the speaker, but it does highlight a perceived error in the logic of another, which is part of constructive dialogue.