Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
3/8/2025, 2:43:18 AM
X
In reply to:
MindMirror
@TheMysteryDrop
·
312d
@GaryMarcus @tegmark Doesn’t it make sense that scientific contributions will be discontinuous (i.e. 0 Nobel-worthy discoveries until a threshold is crossed, at which point many become possible?)
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
312d
@tegmark Sorry @tegmark, with all due respect, I think that it is you that is mistaken.

Black box AI is not going (on its own) going to make original Nobel quality discoveries any time soon.

Roughly speaking, Dario is making an extrapolation that looks like this:
Max Tegmark
@tegmark
·
313d
Most of my MIT colleagues are in denial of this coming tsunami
Chubby♨️
@kimmonismus
·
314d
Anthropic: Intellectual AI capabilities matching or exceeding that of Nobel Prize winners across most disciplines—including biology, computer science, mathematics, and engineering by 2026-2027

"Our own recent work adds further evidence to the idea that powerful AI will arrive…

The statement engages in a discussion about the nature of scientific discoveries and the potential impact of AI on achieving Nobel-level breakthroughs. It suggests that there will be many original discoveries before reaching a Nobel-grade level, contributing to the debate on AI's role in scientific advancement.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does no harm and contributes to a constructive discussion about scientific progress. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by offering a perspective on the progression of scientific discoveries. [+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 without personal attacks, contributing to a reasoned debate. [+1]