Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 115
6/15/2025, 3:32:47 PM
X
In reply to:
Ryan Greenblatt
@RyanPGreenblatt
·
51d
@GaryMarcus This is a pretty clear strawman of at least me.

I do think AGI could be here in 2 years though this seems unlikely (~15% depending on the operationalization) and I think there are specific pieces of evidence that would make me put lower/high probability on this: specifically
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
51d
You know why it sucks to be a doomer?

Because they have wrapped themselves up in a tizzy by assuming that literally any sign of intelligence might mean that AGI could be here in two years via “fast takeoff”, and by dismissing literally every sign that it might not coming in two

The statement is part of a public discourse on the topic of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and its potential timeline, engaging in a debate about the likelihood of AGI development within a few years. The tone is analytical and aims to clarify a point about probability distribution in predictions.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is focused on clarifying a point about probability distribution, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by addressing a specific aspect of the debate, which is the probability distribution of AGI predictions, thus aligning with the principle of promoting understanding. [+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 addressing a specific argument without resorting to personal attacks, adhering to the principle of constructive criticism. [+1]