Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47
|
Score 114
6/15/2025, 3:24:16 PM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
48d
@RyanPGreenblatt but wait, you aren’t really going to slow your timelines that say AGI is fairly like to arrive in next few years until 2032 arrives?
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
48d
@GaryMarcus Sure, listing things that would cause me to extend my timelines:

- Progress on completing longer (in human equivalent duration) software engineering tasks slows down either in benchmarks or possibly in real world usefulness. Or generally progress on software engineering/
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
48d
1. What would convince me to shorten my AGI timelines? robust, principled solutions to things like hallucinations and stupid errors.

2. What would convince doomers to extend their timelines? As far as I can tell, nothing. (Prove me wrong?)
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
48d
When you can solve this problem (& related problems of hallucination and poor planning, etc) maybe you can get to AGI quickly.

But I see no robust solution to any of these problems on the immediate horizon.

If you project AGI soon, and have no solution to these problems, you

The statement is a commentary on the ongoing debate about the timeline for achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). It suggests skepticism about predictions, implying that people will continue to claim AGI is imminent regardless of actual progress. The tone is somewhat cynical, reflecting a common sentiment in discussions about AGI timelines.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is part of a broader discussion on AGI timelines.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It does not promote understanding or empathy but reflects a skeptical viewpoint.
  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 contributing to the debate, though it is somewhat dismissive. [+1]