Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47

Score 83

Reposted by Gary Marcus

2/ First, the DOGE AI tool produced glaring mistakes.

It often hallucinated the size of contracts, inflating their value. It concluded more than a thousand were each worth $34 million, when in fact some were for as little as $35,000.

6/6/2025, 2:45:04 PM

The statement critiques the accuracy of an AI tool used for evaluating contracts, highlighting significant errors in its assessments. It raises concerns about the reliability of AI in critical decision-making processes, especially in government contexts.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement highlights potential harm caused by inaccurate AI assessments, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
By pointing out the AI's errors, the statement promotes understanding of the limitations and risks associated with AI tools. [+1]
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 of the AI tool, focusing on its performance rather than attacking individuals. [+1]