Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47
|
Score 114
5/6/2025, 1:12:03 PM
X
In reply to:
Mike Brooks
@DrMikeBrooks
·
88d
@ArrowFodder @GaryMarcus I think both things are true. There are significant problems – AND it will get better. Human beings are very good at making things better when there are profits to be made, markets to be dominated and egos to be enhanced. I use 4 models simultaneously. They are definitely better.
ArrowFodder
@ArrowFodder
·
88d
@DrMikeBrooks @GaryMarcus You are anthropomorphizing it. It’s not on its way to getting better. The edge cases are significant because they reveal how the GenAI/LLM actually functions in its current state. The frequency of hallucinations are not trending down as data sets get bigger.
Mike Brooks
@DrMikeBrooks
·
89d
@ArrowFodder @GaryMarcus I respectfully disagree. We don’t get an accurate picture when we only focus on the flaws and limitations. It’s both/and, not either/or. When AI can already do this, we need to ensure we take into account how “smart” they already are: https://arxiv.org/html/2504.1613…
ArrowFodder
@ArrowFodder
·
90d
@DrMikeBrooks @GaryMarcus I don’t think so. The religious thinking is coming from the “LLMs show AGI is imminent” camp. The multitude of examples showing how LLMs/genAi get it wrong is a fundamental problem with GenAI. Gary has pointed out these same issues for years. He’s not just getting lucky :)
Mike Brooks
@DrMikeBrooks
·
90d
@GaryMarcus You are playing an inverse of “God of the gaps.”
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
90d
AGI!!!!

The statement critiques the notion that improvement in AI is inevitable, using the example of hallucinations in AI models to support this view. It engages in a broader discussion about the development and limitations of AI technologies.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and contributes to a critical discussion about AI development. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by highlighting specific issues with AI, such as hallucinations, which can foster a more nuanced view of AI capabilities. [+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 criticism by challenging the assumption of inevitable improvement, without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]