Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
6/15/2025, 12:22:00 PM
X
In reply to:
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
25d
@GaryMarcus @ChrisPainterYup I'd also love to hear a response on this; I don't understand the model where "can learn with sample efficiency and speed of 10 year old" is more than ~weeks before strongly superhuman AI, and it's entirely plausible it happens after hitting superhuman capabilities instead.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
26d
@ChrisPainterYup i just posed a lot of questions and nay respond further tomorrow
Chris Painter
@ChrisPainterYup
·
26d
@GaryMarcus I’d be interested in your reaction to this critique of your criteria, especially the first point Ryan makes:
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
26d
If AIs could learn as efficiently as a bright 10 year old child, then shortly after this point AIs would likely be generally superhuman via learning on more data and compute than a human can.

So, I don't expect human level learning and sample efficiency until very powerful AI.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
26d
If we were 2 years from some kind of singularity-like AGI, I would expect current AI to be able to

• (minimally) do essentially anything cognitive that a bright 10 year child could do, such as understand movies, acquire the basics of new skills quickly, learn complex,

The statement is part of a public discourse on the topic of AI development and its implications, specifically discussing the timeline and capabilities of AI in relation to human cognitive abilities. The tone is inquisitive and seeks clarification, indicating a desire for constructive dialogue.

  1. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement seeks to promote understanding by asking for clarification on a potentially misunderstood point, which aligns with promoting empathy and compassion in discourse. [+1]
  2. 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 asking questions and seeking clarification rather than making personal attacks, which aligns with the principle of engaging in constructive criticism. [+1]