Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
3/7/2025, 6:00:15 PM
X
In reply to:
Paul Jones
@PaulJon91817883
·
312d
@GaryMarcus This is what Hubert Dreyfus warned of, too.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
312d
I genuinely fear for this.

The covid era combined with social media has taken away what modest critical thinking skills many people have (and destroyed the ability of many people to listen to others) and LLMs are taking away what remained of critical skills for many.
Larry Rosenthal
@LarryRosenthal
·
312d
@GaryMarcus This is how AI becomes more intelligent than people in the 21st century. We lose 40 points of IQ within a decade.

The conversation involves a critique of current societal and political issues, including the impact of social media and AI on critical thinking, and a controversial decision by the US military. The tone is critical and somewhat alarmist, with a focus on perceived declines in intelligence and decision-making.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement expresses concern about societal issues, aiming to highlight potential harm caused by AI and social media, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement criticizes an administration and military decision, which could be seen as disrespectful, potentially violating the principle of respecting privacy and dignity. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement attempts to promote understanding of the issues related to AI and critical thinking, aligning with the principle of promoting understanding. [+1]
  4. 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 includes a strong critique of an administration, which could be seen as a personal attack, potentially violating the principle of engaging in constructive criticism. [-1]