Gary Marcus

Rank 18 of 47
|
Score 61
6/23/2025, 3:06:04 PM
X
In reply to:
Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh
@S_OhEigeartaigh
·
8d
@GaryMarcus A receipt:
https://forum.effectivealtruism.…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
8d
@S_OhEigeartaigh many in AI safety (Tegmark most prominently) are promoting the notion of imminence.

Very few are publicly disputing it. (Names? Links?)
Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh
@S_OhEigeartaigh
·
8d
@GaryMarcus very few in AI safety are claiming AGI is here. Some are claiming that the current paradigm could lead to AGI v quickly (on the basis of true belief, I think) under the current paradigm which is very unsafe. Most of those are arguing things like "if anyone builds it, everyone
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
8d
@S_OhEigeartaigh every claim that AGI is here is doing this, pressing down the gas pedal and distracting from the desperate but not-publicly-acknowledge need for alternative architectures.

on the whole the AI safety community has strengthened not weakened those would accelerate unreliable and
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
10d
we are desperately far from a solution to the alignment problem, yet everyone just keeps pressing the gas pedal harder and harder.
Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh
@S_OhEigeartaigh
·
8d
@GaryMarcus Because acknowledging the sky is blue feels a bit redundant. Has literally anyone ever said it would, ever?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
8d
Why is it so hard to get the AI Safety community to acknowledge the obvious fact stated in the first sentence below?

The statement is part of a discussion on AI safety and risk, specifically addressing the discourse around AGI and its potential dangers. It acknowledges and supports a viewpoint that calls for caution in AI risk coverage, suggesting a need for more consideration of this perspective.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement supports a cautious approach to AI risk, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By encouraging consideration of a cautious perspective, it promotes understanding and empathy towards differing views on AI risk. [+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 constructively with the ongoing debate, avoiding personal attacks and focusing on the content of the discussion. [+1]