Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
3/5/2025, 2:53:53 AM
X
In reply to:
jimi silverhand
@jimnasyum
·
300d
@SebasL29480 @ChombaBupe @GaryMarcus he said in a reply recently that AGI might come in 10+ years, which I think is still very optimistic.

I do agree with his points for LLMs tho
Complicatedballer
@SebasL29480
·
300d
@jimnasyum @ChombaBupe @GaryMarcus Compared to what most say it’s not optimistic at all. I still think he is one of the most reasonable people in ai, even though he might be slightly too skeptical. Him, lecun and chollet are the most reasonable imo. And they are all known as skeptics.
jimi silverhand
@jimnasyum
·
300d
@SebasL29480 @ChombaBupe @GaryMarcus Gary Marcus is an LLM skeptic, but he's also quite a big AI optimist. I won't begrudge him that, but I still think his timeline for AGI is overly optimistic.
Complicatedballer
@SebasL29480
·
300d
@ChombaBupe many are currently working on these methods. Even the most known ai skeptics like @GaryMarcus who I respect and makes great points always notes that we will get agi one day, it’s just probably going to take longer, possibly a lot longer than hype men like Sam Altman say.
Complicatedballer
@SebasL29480
·
300d
@ChombaBupe Computer scientists, neuroscientists, maybe some other relevant fields like psychology.
Most means, every experts opinion that I see on it recognizes that agi is completely possible, some think scaling will get us there, most think other methods will get us there and (1/2)
Chomba Bupe
@ChombaBupe
·
300d
Whose an expert in artificial general intelligence (AGI) if I may ask?

Whose an expert in prediction of the future?

And what does "most" mean here when it's just a few noisy people shouting from the rooftops about imminent AGI?

The statement is part of a broader discussion on the timeline and development of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), which is a significant public issue in the field of artificial intelligence. The conversation involves differing opinions on the optimism or skepticism regarding AGI's future, contributing to public discourse on technological advancements and their implications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is a clarification of a previous comment, maintaining a neutral tone. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement contributes to understanding by clarifying a previous point, promoting a more accurate interpretation of the speaker's stance. [+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 by addressing a potential misunderstanding without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]