Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47
|
Score 93
5/10/2025, 2:24:37 AM
X
In reply to:
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
9d
@GaryMarcus @Wasgo @polynoamial I think math capabilities dramatically exceed what I expected when GPT-4 came out in March 2023. I didn’t have strong priors about capabilities in other areas.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
9d
@littmath @Wasgo @polynoamial Do you think where we are now where you would have plotted the curve after the original gpt through gpt-4, given the exponential increases in data and compute?
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
9d
@GaryMarcus @Wasgo @polynoamial I’m referring to the claim in the Sam Altman post you quoted: that “intelligence scales logarithmically with resources.”
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
9d
@littmath @Wasgo @polynoamial I think you are defending some notion of scaling law that I don’t quite follow that seems to be very different from the public conversation about these things.

I almost get from you that any nonmonotically increasing function ?or any function whatsover) could be fit post hoc and
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
9d
@GaryMarcus @Wasgo @polynoamial Ok. FWIW what I find frustrating about this conversation is that you keep turning to points on which we agree (lots of AI hype, adoption will be slow) and arguing as if I disagree, while avoiding the actual subject I’m interested in (what does “scaling laws failed” mean).
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
9d
@littmath @Wasgo @polynoamial Experts could adjudicate many; I don’t think that’s fair,

It would be labor intensive and to some degree subjective, but I bet you could consensus on most. (Whether i turned out to be correct or not)

The statement is part of a technical discussion on AI capabilities, specifically regarding the scaling of intelligence with resources and the factors influencing AI performance. It engages with public issues related to AI development and its implications, thus constituting public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is focused on a technical discussion, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement seeks to understand the factors influencing AI capabilities, promoting understanding and knowledge sharing. [+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 dialogue, asking questions and seeking clarification without personal attacks. [+1]