Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47

Score 104

@hamilton_mcmc They actually had revenue (not much) and at least one custome. So your first sentence was made up.

In an earlier essay I too leaned towards we work. The o3 presentation looks misleading on multiple counts, as discussed both here and on my substack, and this has lead me to…

1/20/2025, 9:52:02 AM

In reply to:

Jason Queries

@hamilton_mcmc

@GaryMarcus OK:

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

@hamilton_mcmc You just made that up. Check your facts.

Jason Queries

@hamilton_mcmc

@GaryMarcus Theranos had 0 customers, 0 revenue. Wework would be a better example, but then real estate was obviously non scaleable. OAI completely different place from these two.

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

Am I the only one getting Theranos vibes?

The statement engages in a factual correction and critique of a previous claim about Theranos, suggesting that the initial statement was inaccurate. It aims to clarify the situation by providing additional context and references to previous discussions.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement strives to correct misinformation, which aligns with the principle of doing no harm by promoting accurate information. [+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 addressing inaccuracies without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]