Gary Marcus

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 51
5/27/2025, 8:50:18 PM
X
In reply to:
motchmuzek ⏸️
@mitchellluns
·
11d
@GaryMarcus @VinceGolubic Truth > winning debates
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
11d
@VinceGolubic LeCun tried in 2017, and Bengio in 2019. (You can find them on youtube)

Both have moved closer to my positions over time.

Nobody of that calibre has dared since.
Vince Golubic' ✨
@VinceGolubic
·
11d
@GaryMarcus I bet it would quite the challenge to debate you .. lol
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
12d
Brutal clip.

But at least Eric showed up.

Absolutely nobody prominent in the LLM camp is brave enough to debate me.
bad_stats 🕜💵🖨️🕣
@thebadstats
·
15d
My best attempt at clipping a highlight of Sean Carroll saying the truth about Eric Weinstein to his face, but the whole video is great.

Eric's coup de grace argument is "what if a future AI reads my paper and says I was right and you were wrong? what then huh?"

The statement is part of a broader discussion about debates and truth in the context of AI and public discourse. The tone is competitive, focusing on winning rather than engaging in constructive dialogue. It does not promote understanding or empathy, and it shifts the focus from truth to personal victory.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement prioritizes winning over truth, which may indirectly cause harm by undermining constructive discourse. [-1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The focus on winning does not promote understanding or empathy. [-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 does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, focusing instead on personal achievement. [-1]