Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
5/18/2025, 1:27:23 PM
X
In reply to:
There is no other room 🇬🇪
@uhbif19
·
248d
@GaryMarcus @davidmanheim @XRobservatory Why have not you used tic-tac-toe or arrows following examples then? I do not think anyone thinks that LLM do not understand tic-tac-toe.

Blind people are intelligent, so this is not a limitation for LLM. There is at least one great geometer (Lev Pontryagin), who was blind.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
248d
@uhbif19 @davidmanheim @XRobservatory I documented a multiple similars one for ChatGPT (not o3) in text but curious why everyone thinks image generation is not a legitimate test of a systems “world model”
There is no other room 🇬🇪
@uhbif19
·
248d
@GaryMarcus @davidmanheim @XRobservatory But it does not make errors like that in text. It just have bad image comprehension, that is all.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
248d
@davidmanheim @uhbif19 @XRobservatory What’s your theory of the psychology of a system that can make an error like that?
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
248d
@uhbif19 @XRobservatory @GaryMarcus was initially claiming that "LLMs that don’t understand clocks and time zones." I agree that image generation is not yet at a point where it gets this right, and that's a real flaw in the models, but the original claim as stated is false.
There is no other room 🇬🇪
@uhbif19
·
248d
@davidmanheim @XRobservatory But that is code, the issue is with the direct image output.

The statement is part of a broader discussion about the capabilities and limitations of language models like ChatGPT, specifically in understanding and processing tasks such as tic-tac-toe strategy. This discussion touches on the public issue of AI capabilities and their 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 a factual observation about the AI's performance, adhering to the principle. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement contributes to understanding the limitations of AI, promoting a better grasp of its current capabilities. [+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 providing an example to support the ongoing discussion, without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]