Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
5/16/2025, 9:13:36 PM
X
In reply to:
VraserX e/acc
@VraserX
·
229d
@OverfitForTruth LeCun claims LLMs can’t reason, invent, or do real science. But AlphaEvolve, built on LLM-like components proved him very wrong:

• It discovered a new lower bound in an open math problem (11D kissing number → from 592 to 593) – something no human had found.
• It reinvented
john
@OverfitForTruth
·
229d
@VraserX wait has it? what was his claims and how did alphaevolve disprove it?
VraserX e/acc
@VraserX
·
229d
Google’s AlphaEvolved has essentially proven Yann LeCun wrong. Thoughts?

The statement engages in a public discourse about the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) and their role in scientific discovery, specifically addressing a debate involving prominent figures in the AI community. The tone is critical and somewhat confrontational, particularly towards those who may not fully understand the technical aspects of the discussion.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but uses a confrontational tone that could be perceived as dismissive.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it dismisses others' ability to comment on the topic without understanding the architecture. [-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 by pointing out a misunderstanding but does so in a way that could be seen as a personal attack, suggesting others should not comment if they don't understand the architecture. [-1]