Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47
|
Score 83
12/31/2024, 4:01:50 PM
X
In reply to:
Alexandre Chiavegatto Filho
@SaudenoBR
·
395d
@GaryMarcus Another issue most have with your takes is that you keep moving the goal post regarding which are your major issues with LLMs, as they keep solving them.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
1256d
More evidence that deep learning is, for all the progress, still stuck when it comes to relations and compositionality.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
395d
@SaudenoBR In sum, you said “quite a few”, but gave only one, and that was based on an erroneous understanding of the original paper.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
395d
@SaudenoBR i didn’t say it would make no further progress, I said it would get stuck on certain problems, which still remain, and that scaling would was not a physical law and would not hold indefinitely or solve those specific problems; please reread the actual paper carefully and my line…
Alexandre Chiavegatto Filho
@SaudenoBR
·
395d
@GaryMarcus There are quite a few, the most famous is probably when you said deep learning was starting to hit a wall in 2022 (before the release of ChatGPT)
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
395d
Gary haters, here’s your chance! For an upcoming roundup, what AI predictions have I made that were wrong?

The statement engages in a technical debate about the limitations of deep learning, specifically regarding compositionality and relational understanding. It references past predictions and ongoing challenges in AI, providing links to further reading and evidence.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm; it focuses on technical critique.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by providing resources and evidence to support its claims. [+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 criticism, addressing disagreements with evidence and reasoned argumentation. [+1]