Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
3/8/2025, 7:08:16 PM
X
In reply to:
Thomas G. Dietterich
@tdietterich
·
312d
@GaryMarcus Furthermore, we need additional research to address precisely the risks that so worry @tegmark
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
312d
“We should stop training [or funding] scientists now. It’s just completely obvious that within three years, AI is going to do better than Nobel Laureates.”

is the new

“We should stop training radiologists now. It’s just completely obvious that within five years, deep…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
313d
@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:

The statement engages in a discussion about the potential and limitations of AI in solving alignment issues, a topic of public concern in AI ethics and safety. It expresses skepticism about AI's ability to generate novel ideas necessary for addressing these issues.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and raises a valid concern about AI's current capabilities. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by highlighting a specific limitation of AI, encouraging further exploration and discussion. [+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 specific point of disagreement without personal attacks. [+1]