Gary Marcus

Rank 18 of 47
|
Score 61
6/16/2025, 1:40:39 PM
X
In reply to:
Alex Alarga ⏹️
@AlexAlarga
·
67d
@GaryMarcus @liron Again, it's likely that you and anti-extinctionists have a very different definition of superintelligence, hence I reiterate my hypothesis that you do not think superintelligence in the SUPER sense of the word is likely.

Because THAT Super version is not alignable by definition.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
68d
@AlexAlarga @liron false. think superintelligence is likely, though not soon, and that we need to radically up our alignment game.
Alex Alarga ⏹️
@AlexAlarga
·
68d
@GaryMarcus @liron That's because superintelligence does not seem likely to you.☑️

Like a destruction of my town seemed not likely to my family not because we thought Putin CAN'T, but because we were sure our Security Guarantors would never allow a full invasion.

Superintelligence must be banned,
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
68d
@AlexAlarga 100% think we need AI regulation but per my episode w @liron, extinction does not seem likely to me.
Alex Alarga ⏹️
@AlexAlarga
·
68d
@GaryMarcus "Anti-extinctionist", doomer is a crappy term.

Many people laughed at "Putin will invade haha" prior to 24.02
It sucks to be anxious.
It sucks even_more to have your family members killed.
We need regulation and oversight of AI, NOW, whatever we think of capabilities, not ignore
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
68d
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 broader discussion on the potential risks and regulation of superintelligence and AI, which is a significant public issue. The tone is inquisitive, seeking clarification on definitions within the debate, which suggests an intent to engage constructively in the discourse.

  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 definitions, which can foster empathy and compassion in the discussion. [+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 for definitions rather than making personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]