Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 84
4/29/2025, 12:49:23 PM
X
In reply to:
Tyler John
@tyler_m_john
·
286d
@GaryMarcus I don't dismiss that view out of hand. I think a lot of people who work on transformer safety think it might be impossible.

Though some arguments for this position imply that the agent paradigm will fail abysmally. (I know you expect that.) We'll know soon.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
286d
@tyler_m_john i think transformers are the wrong way to go, and will never be aligned
Tyler John
@tyler_m_john
·
286d
@GaryMarcus Try hand coding some values for GPT-2-tiny, I suspect you'll pretty quickly hit a wall but if not it would be the breakthrough of the century
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
286d
@tyler_m_john it’s more than a trillion actions but its not a trillion norms. maybe it’s only 100 and we should hand-write some of them, rather than leaving everything entirely to the chance vicissitudes of what is in some training corpus.
Tyler John
@tyler_m_john
·
286d
@GaryMarcus Every decision or speech act bakes in a billion complex, subtle values, about efficiency, honesty, empathy, respect, social norms, empiricism, aesthetics, deference, humility, and on and on. How would you write a set of goals that leads to good norms across a trillion actions?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
286d
@tyler_m_john Why are the values so complicated?

Can’t be hand coded in a LLM but that’s an a LLM issue, not inherent to AI.

The statement engages in a discussion about the safety and effectiveness of transformer models in AI, which is a significant topic in the field of artificial intelligence and technology ethics. The tone is skeptical and somewhat dismissive, questioning the progress in transformer safety and predicting failure of current AI agents.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but expresses skepticism about the progress in transformer safety. It does not promote harm but could be seen as dismissive of ongoing efforts.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is critical without offering constructive suggestions or insights into how improvements might be made. [-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 criticism but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It questions the effectiveness of current AI models without targeting individuals personally.