Gary Marcus

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 52
6/28/2025, 9:09:05 PM
X
In reply to:
Lawrence Chan
@justanotherlaw
·
53d
@GaryMarcus @ohabryka I don’t think you did, but I suspect most people reading your pieces in 2020 would’ve come away thinking that eg GPT-4 couldn’t have possibly worked:
https://thegradient.pub/gpt2-and…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
53d
@justanotherlaw @ohabryka but i didn’t actually say that.
Lawrence Chan
@justanotherlaw
·
53d
@GaryMarcus @ohabryka While I think your specific predictions have been above average, I do think people would’ve been quite wrong about how AI in 2025 was like if they internalized your general mood of “AI won’t work” in 2019-20. Oli is probably referring to that.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
53d
@justanotherlaw @ohabryka it was completely unfair, and his nitpicking exercise didn’t change that.
Lawrence Chan
@justanotherlaw
·
53d
@GaryMarcus @ohabryka I do think it’s quite unfair to say that Gary is “exceptionally bad”! He’s doing better than the horde of people who confidently asserted that AIs wouldn’t be able do particular things that they did.
Lawrence Chan
@justanotherlaw
·
53d
@GaryMarcus @ohabryka Paul was pretty correct about “prosaic” AI alignment (where you assume there are no fundamental changes from the deep learning paradigm) being the thing to work on back in 2015-6, while most of the AI(S) community was on the “deep learning won’t work” train.

The statement 'genuine understanding is still the problem' engages in public discourse by addressing the ongoing debate about AI's capabilities and limitations. It suggests that despite advancements, AI lacks true understanding, which is a critical issue in AI development.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and contributes to a constructive discussion about AI's limitations. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by highlighting a key issue in AI development, encouraging further exploration and discussion. [+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 addressing a specific problem without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]