Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 95
5/10/2025, 1:32:31 AM
X
In reply to:
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
39d
@GaryMarcus @Wasgo @polynoamial Ok, I don’t understand what this means.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
39d
@littmath @Wasgo @polynoamial The fact that we don’t have gpt-5 isn’t because the benchmarks have saturated.
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
39d
@Wasgo @GaryMarcus @polynoamial I don’t think it needs to be formal to be a claim we can try to evaluate heuristically by benchmarking. Lots of benchmarks seem to scale logarithmically with compute in some (pre-saturation) regime.
Cameron Williams
@Wasgo
·
39d
@littmath @GaryMarcus @polynoamial Is there any formal definition for this version of the law though? Altman refers to intelligence which isn’t actually a defined standard. He seems to cherry pick what intelligence means every time he refers to it.
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
39d
@GaryMarcus @Wasgo @polynoamial This is what I understood by scaling laws; it’s obviously compatible with diminishing returns to scale.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
39d
@Wasgo @littmath @polynoamial How about this one? Source: https://blog.samaltman.com/three…

The statement engages in a technical discussion about AI scaling laws and their limitations, specifically addressing the issues of hallucinations and errors in AI models. It critiques the notion that exponential scaling alone can solve core AI problems, suggesting a need for more nuanced approaches.

  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 constructive technical debate. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by challenging existing assumptions and encouraging deeper analysis of AI development. [+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 without personal attacks, focusing on the technical aspects of AI scaling. [+1]