Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
4/26/2025, 12:46:50 PM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
266d
“I did about five minutes of experimentation, and it’s wildly inconsistent, and that’s what you expect of GenAI, which is very dependent on specific examples in training sets and not very abstract,” says Gary Marcus, a cognitive scientist and author of Taming Silicon Valley: How

The statement critiques Google's AI for generating plausible but incorrect explanations, highlighting a flaw in AI's reliance on training data. It engages in public discourse by addressing the limitations of AI technology.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm; it critiques technology constructively. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by explaining a specific AI limitation. [+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 critique is constructive and does not involve personal attacks. [+1]