Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
5/8/2025, 1:15:00 PM
X
In reply to:
Alex Alarga ⏹️
@AlexAlarga
·
64d
@GaryMarcus As with tobacco and fossil fuels, the externalities are passed on to the rest of us to pay. God forbid it eats into the profits.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
64d
How, wise guy?

As ever, the negative externalities are passed on to society. Redesigning the curriculum will be expensive. Who will pay for that?
Kevin Roose
@kevinroose
·
64d
I'm sympathetic to the professors quoted in this, but at a certain point if your students can cheat their way through your class with AI, you probably need to redesign your class. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/…

The statement is part of a broader conversation about the impact of AI on education and the associated costs of redesigning curricula to address AI-related cheating. The tone is critical and questions the prioritization of profits over societal costs.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but questions the prioritization of profits, which can be seen as a critique of potential harm caused by neglecting societal costs.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement indirectly promotes understanding by highlighting the issue of externalities and the need for societal responsibility. [+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 a critical dialogue without personal attacks, focusing on the issue rather than individuals. [+1]
  4. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    By questioning the prioritization of profits over societal costs, the statement uses influence to highlight a societal issue. [+1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech by engaging in a public debate about societal costs and responsibilities. [+1]