Gary Marcus

Rank 31 of 47
|
Score -2
1/19/2025, 9:03:27 PM
X
In reply to:
𝖦𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗌 ⏳
@Grimezsz
·
49d
@GaryMarcus @neuroAnjiolina @davetroy I'm saying I wouldn't do this. When I was young I had this pov because I was evidently insane.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
49d
@neuroAnjiolina @davetroy @Grimezsz honestly why would you sell out humans so some piece of software can persist for a long time?

I don’t get this.
AnjiĂłlina Nakaya
@neuroAnjiolina
·
49d
@davetroy @GaryMarcus See this "optimism" by Grimes on immortality which actually means extinction of humanity.
AnjiĂłlina Nakaya
@neuroAnjiolina
·
67d
wth is this. So there are people like Grimes who want to accelerate AI, because they believe it will save our species but if it becomes like a god, they will submit to it and allow humans to go extinct.

I am now thinking that Grimes and Elon actually deserved each other.
Dave Troy
@davetroy
·
49d
@GaryMarcus Agree, and generally of the opinion that tech should be a pro-social force that doesn’t inherently involve the formation of an enemy out-group. If it’s really good, it brings everyone benefits. Pursue the really good.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
49d
Feel the same.
Dr. Émile P. Torres
@xriskology
·
50d
E/acc makes me more confident in the "doomsday" or "self-destruct" explanation of the Fermi paradox. Their recklessness (different from optimism) is not compatible with the survival of civilization. In this sense, they are best described as an anti-civilizational force.

The statement is a lighthearted response to a serious discussion about AI and human extinction. It uses humor to express agreement with a previous point about changing perspectives over time.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement uses humor and does not appear to cause harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by acknowledging a change in perspective. [+1]