Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
12/31/2024, 10:50:37 AM
X
In reply to:
Boaz Barak
@boazbaraktcs
·
394d
@GaryMarcus @Miles_Brundage By definition Nobel, Pullitzer, and Oscar are exceptional.

Btw in Pullitzer does it have to be books or can it be articles or short stories? And does it have to be fiction AND non fiction?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
394d
@boazbaraktcs @Miles_Brundage Right. Though we give the judges discretion reporting their findings so they could say eg “technically Gary wins the bet but on all the tasks that ordinary people and experts might be expected to we found success, and it was only on matching exceptional performance that they…
Boaz Barak
@boazbaraktcs
·
394d
@Miles_Brundage @GaryMarcus Sorry I see it’s unclear - what I mean is that if AI doesn’t succeed to do at least one of those then you lose. (Since you then get at most 7)
Boaz Barak
@boazbaraktcs
·
394d
@Miles_Brundage @GaryMarcus If AI fails to do at least one of those things then you lose. Am I wrong?
Miles Brundage
@Miles_Brundage
·
394d
@boazbaraktcs @GaryMarcus Also, I don’t nec automatically lose if one of those doesn’t happen.
Miles Brundage
@Miles_Brundage
·
394d
@boazbaraktcs @GaryMarcus FWIW, I don’t think Gary described the bet odds as being AI skeptical, we just said we both agreed it’d constitute big progress + that I think it’s likely.

Most would agree it’s a lopsided bet even by today’s standards. I just think even today’s standards are still not bullish…

The statement is part of a broader conversation about the criteria and standards for prestigious awards like the Nobel and Pulitzer Prizes, and how these standards relate to AI achievements. It reflects on the subjective nature of 'caliber' in award nominations and winners, using examples to illustrate the point. The tone is analytical and reflective, aiming to contribute to a discussion on the evaluation of excellence in various fields.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and maintains a respectful tone, adhering to the principle of doing no harm with words. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by discussing the subjective nature of award standards, encouraging a nuanced view of excellence. [+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 constructive dialogue without personal attacks, focusing on the topic rather than individuals. [+1]