Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
5/14/2025, 1:24:08 PM
X
In reply to:
carstenbergenholtz
@justsomeoneDK
·
227d
@GaryMarcus @paulg When someone says X works, one does not necessarily say that X works for all purposes - just that it works for some use-cases (maybe even fewer than claimed by seller). In contrast, Theranos 'product' didn't work at all, for any use case. Hence, a clear and relevant difference.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
227d
@paulg Thanks for engaging, @paulg. I often enjoy your comments but I think that this one is an importantly erroneous oversimplification of ChatGPT’s reality:

1. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn’t. It is fundamentally erratic, yet presents nearly all answers with confidence —
Paul Graham
@paulg
·
227d
@GaryMarcus ChatGPT works.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
228d
Elizabeth Holmes was an amateur.

The statement is part of a public discourse about the reliability and effectiveness of technologies like ChatGPT and Theranos. It provides factual information to clarify a previous claim about Theranos' FDA approval, contributing to a nuanced discussion.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm by providing factual information to correct a potential misunderstanding. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by clarifying the specific context of Theranos' FDA approval, which aids in a more informed discussion. [+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 by addressing a specific point without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]