Reposted by Gary Marcus
The statement critiques the reliability and efficiency of o3, a language model, suggesting that better technology will emerge after the current hype subsides. It engages in a broader discussion about the future of AI and its development, aligning with public discourse on technological advancements.
- The statement does not cause harm and is a speculative critique of technology, which is a common part of public discourse. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by discussing potential limitations and future improvements in AI technology. [+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.