Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
6/29/2025, 3:15:10 PM
X
In reply to:
David A. Anderson
@DavesBrewFarm
·
14d
@GaryMarcus @primalpoly Do you/we think we can put the AI Genie back in the bottle for a time-out at this point?
You're suggesting the Greedy People can/will pause their relentless Greedering because it's the right/sensible thing to do?!?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
14d
Here is the best argument for pausing AI until safety is worked out (however many centuries that might take, per @primalpoly).

• You can’t possibly follow laws like Asimov’s Laws (or better alternatives to them) if you can’t reliably learn to abide by simple thing like the
neuralamp
@neuralamp4ever
·
14d
@GaryMarcus

The statement critiques the role of government and corporations in the development and regulation of AI, expressing concern over their motivations and actions. It suggests that the government is supporting corporate interests rather than regulating them for public safety.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement implies harm by suggesting that government and corporations are acting against public interest, but it does not directly cause harm.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects privacy but uses strong language ('greedy people') that could be seen as disrespectful. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding of the issue by highlighting concerns about AI regulation. [+1]
  4. 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.
    It engages in criticism of government and corporate actions but uses a somewhat accusatory tone. [-1]