Gary Marcus

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 57
4/17/2025, 2:47:35 AM
X
In reply to:
Liron Shapira
@liron
·
2d
@GaryMarcus @rao2z Ok so we’re allowed to have a scenario where AI can derive arbitrarily large subgoals and implement them, potentially upending civilization as we know it, but it doesn’t count as “agency” because 5 years ago a human said “beat Elon to Mars”?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
2d
@liron @rao2z Not in the sense of having its own goals (though it would be very impressive in its own right).
Liron Shapira
@liron
·
2d
@GaryMarcus @rao2z How big does the externally-supplied goal have to be before the sub goals are sufficiently independent/agentic for you? E.g. if the goal is beat Elon to Mars and the AI doesn’t require any more instructions for 5 years and succeeds, that’s still not agentic?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
2d
@liron @rao2z Those are orthogonal dimensions. Following instructions vs coming up with its own strategic goals independent of instructions.
Liron Shapira
@liron
·
2d
@GaryMarcus @rao2z If it’s executing a sufficiently big plan competently, without human intervention, is there a particular point when it’s acting independently? Seems like a continuum.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
2d
@liron That sounds like planning, which as @rao2z will tell you, is still inadequate, rather than a capacity to act independently, which IMHO could be more concerning.

The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the nature of agency in AI, touching on philosophical, psychological, and safety concerns. It contributes to public discourse by addressing societal issues related to AI development and its implications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and focuses on discussing complex issues, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by referencing longstanding discussions in psychology, philosophy, and safety, fostering a deeper exploration of the topic. [+2]
  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 referencing existing debates and does not resort to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+2]
  4. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech principles by responsibly engaging in a discussion about AI and its implications, using the platform to contribute to a meaningful dialogue. [+1]