Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 84
6/27/2025, 4:23:15 PM
X
In reply to:
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
228d
@TjAllard @GaryMarcus I have been told that the general experience of AI developers is that frontier LLMs mostly outperform sophisticated wrapper efforts, etc. That's certainly true in geopolitical forecasting, which is a field I follow closely, but I have heard the same is true in other fields.
TJ Allard
@TjAllard
·
228d
@davidmanheim @GaryMarcus Foundational step in this case refers to real world implementation (applied ai). Having the specific ontological structure for a corpus that an epistemological structure can be built on top of is how I’m seeing success at scale. It’s dirty, time consuming, and hands on work of
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
228d
@TjAllard @GaryMarcus I'm skeptical that we need another "foundational step" - or I don't know what you mean by that.
TJ Allard
@TjAllard
·
228d
@GaryMarcus @davidmanheim This! This will help in general, practical ai application will require another foundational step of domain specificity.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
228d
@davidmanheim certainly never argued that AI would never exceed humans; i said it wouldn’t without having symbols in the loop
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
228d
@GaryMarcus It might also be a vindication of those claiming that in practice, even non-symbolic methods can end up with human-level capabilities once scaled and extended, whether directly or not - and that there may be no barrier to improving far past the point of human capability.

The statement is part of a technical discussion on AI development, specifically addressing the need for external symbolic tools in certain tasks. It engages with public discourse by contributing to the debate on AI methodologies and their practical applications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is focused on providing empirical evidence, 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 aims to promote understanding by providing empirical evidence, which can foster informed discussion and empathy for differing viewpoints. [+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 in constructive dialogue by providing evidence to support a point in an ongoing discussion, without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]