In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
59d
The statement critiques the feasibility of rapid advancements in AI as proposed in a public roadmap. It questions the claim that research cycles can be drastically shortened, particularly in the context of long-term studies. The tone is skeptical and aims to provide a reality check on ambitious technological timelines.
- The statement aims to prevent harm by cautioning against unrealistic expectations in AI development timelines, which could lead to misinformation or misguided investments. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by challenging the feasibility of the proposed timeline, without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]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.