Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
6/29/2025, 3:21:33 PM
X
In reply to:
David A. Anderson
@DavesBrewFarm
路
13d
@GaryMarcus @primalpoly What's the government's endgame in egging on? Is it military-driven (most likely) or some other path to Absolute Global Insanity (better known as AGI 馃槈)?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
路
13d
@DavesBrewFarm @primalpoly good luck with the greedy people who own the LLMs.

but it鈥檚 really depressing that government is egging them on (and facilitating them) rather than reining them in.
David A. Anderson
@DavesBrewFarm
路
13d
@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
路
13d
Here is the best argument for pausing AI until safety is worked out (however many centuries that might take, per @primalpoly).

鈥⒙燳ou can鈥檛 possibly follow laws like Asimov鈥檚 Laws (or better alternatives to them) if you can鈥檛 reliably learn to abide by simple thing like the
neuralamp
@neuralamp4ever
路
13d
@GaryMarcus

The statement 'follow the money' suggests skepticism about the motivations behind government actions related to AI development. It implies that financial interests may be driving decisions rather than public safety or ethical considerations.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement implies potential harm by suggesting financial motivations may override safety concerns, 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 and dignity, as it does not target individuals or groups with harassment or hate speech.聽[+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by encouraging scrutiny of financial motivations, though it could be more constructive.
  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 constructive criticism by questioning motivations but lacks depth in dialogue.