Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
12/31/2024, 4:39:22 AM
X
In reply to:
Tim Spalding ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฆ
@librarythingtim
ยท
394d
Bets are good. This is the Simonโ€“Ehrlich wager for our time. I have questions about some of them, but overall I think Marcus will prove right, but thatโ€”no matter whatโ€”AI boosters will claim he was wrong. Indeed, some of the responses already claim AI can do these thingsโ€ฆ
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
ยท
394d
๐—” ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐˜ ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜„๐—ถ๐—น๐—น ๐—”๐—œ ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ ๐—ฎ๐˜ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฌ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿณ: @Miles_Brundage, formerly of OpenAI, bravely takes a version of the bet I offered @Elonmusk! Proceeds to charity.

Can AI do 8 of these 10 by the end of 2027?

1. Watch a previously unseen mainstreamโ€ฆ

The statement by @librarythingtim, 'Claim โ€“ without systematic data,' is a critique of a previous assertion regarding AI capabilities. It engages in a public discourse about the future of AI, referencing a bet on AI's progress by 2027. The tone is skeptical, suggesting that claims about AI's abilities are not backed by systematic data.

  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 constructive criticism by questioning the basis of claims about AI without resorting to personal attacks. It invites further dialogue on the evidence supporting AI predictions.ย [+1]