Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
6/17/2025, 8:09:48 PM
X
In reply to:
Saratoshi Nagamoto
@sowmaler
·
20d
@GaryMarcus I disagree. If war is going to exist anyway, I want our commanders and leaders to have the best tools to help them make better and more effective decisions.

Besides, LLMs can be an awesome tool for the military during peacetime as well. They can be implemented to help with
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
20d
@sowmaler war is not a good use case.
Saratoshi Nagamoto
@sowmaler
·
20d
@GaryMarcus And this is all I need 99% of the time.

For example, I want a customized LLM that assists combat units conducting MDMP, resulting in better command decisions for military operations. This can save hundreds of lives in a single mission. They are extremely useful during wargaming
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
20d
LLMs in a nutshell:
Gorgi Kosev
@spion
·
20d
@AxelMtbr @GaryMarcus @rohanpaul_ai They are decent solvers of already solved problems indeed.

The statement critiques the use of language models (LLMs) in military contexts, specifically in war, by highlighting their limitations in domain generalization. The tone is critical and focuses on the practical implications of using LLMs in such high-stakes environments.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but critiques the potential harm of using unreliable tools in warfare, aligning with 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 does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is focused on a technical critique rather than fostering dialogue or empathy.
  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 criticism by addressing the limitations of LLMs in a specific context without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]