Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47

|

Score 64

+4

@DoHoJr @llmvibes @sama Phlogiston was popular in its day. So was the idea that genes were made of some kind of protein.

In the long run, science self-corrects. When you see how much even the LLM people are starting to supplement their techniques with symbolic code, stumbling towards the neurosymbolic

6/17/2025, 4:00:46 PM

In reply to:

Donchalant

@DoHoJr

·

24d

@GaryMarcus @llmvibes @sama Gary, actual science is a popularity contest, Nikola Tesla would say so. Galileo, Da Vinci, Newton. Yep They'd all agree. And has anyone made the case as to why society actually needs AI? Why are we not exploring better dimensional coherence analysis to expedite our error

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

·

24d

@llmvibes @sama unless we solve the problems of distribution shift that i pointed out nearly 30 years ago, we will never get to AGI.

unless we follow the path towards neurosymbolic AI I laid down, we will never get to AGI.

science isn’t a popularity contest.

Patrick

@llmvibes

·

24d

@GaryMarcus Hi Gary,

Serious question.

Who has contributed more to AI, @garymarcus or @sama?

Have a nice day.

Best regards,
Patrick

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

·

24d

For those alleging I am often wrong, here’s what I actually predicted (December, 2022). Bang on, whether you like it or not.

Two and a half years later: Still no GPT-5. And not one of the problems I pointed has been solved in a stable, enduring, principled way.

The statement engages in a discussion about the evolution of scientific ideas and the self-correcting nature of science, particularly in the context of AI development. It suggests that current AI techniques are evolving towards a neurosymbolic approach, reflecting on past scientific misconceptions to highlight the iterative nature of scientific progress.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not cause harm and instead reflects on the nature of scientific progress, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
It promotes understanding by drawing parallels between historical scientific misconceptions and current AI developments, fostering a broader perspective on scientific evolution. [+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 contributing to the discussion on AI development without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]