Gary Marcus

Rank 9 of 47
|
Score 112
6/16/2025, 6:36:25 PM
X
In reply to:
Nihal Jaytirth Krishan
@NihalKrishan
·
38d
"As @GaryMarcus concedes, "At least for the next decade, LLMs (with and without inference time "reasoning") will continue have their uses, especially for coding and brainstorming and writing.""

CC: @benjedwards,@arstechnica

Apple study authors:@ParshinShojaee @KeivanAlizadeh2
Nihal Jaytirth Krishan
@NihalKrishan
·
38d
“However, that doesn't mean these AI models are useless. Even elaborate pattern-matching machines can be useful in performing labor-saving tasks for the people that use them, given an understanding of their drawbacks and confabulations."
Nihal Jaytirth Krishan
@NihalKrishan
·
38d
“Apple's [study] results, combined with the USAMO findings, seem to strengthen the case made by critics like @GaryMarcus that these systems rely on elaborate pattern-matching rather than the kind of systematic reasoning their marketing might suggest."
Nihal Jaytirth Krishan
@NihalKrishan
·
38d
NEWS: “The results of the Apple study have so far been explosive in the AI community. Generative AI is a controversial topic, with many people gravitating toward extreme positions in an ongoing ideological battle over the models' general utility."

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2025/…

The statement 'yep' is a minimal response in a conversation about the utility and limitations of AI models, specifically in the context of a study by Apple. The conversation involves a discussion on whether AI models truly reason or rely on pattern-matching, which is a substantive public issue related to technology and its implications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement 'yep' does not cause harm, but it also does not actively contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion as it is a simple agreement without elaboration.
  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 does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, nor does it involve personal attacks. It is neutral and non-contributory.