Gary Marcus

Rank 15 of 47
|
Score 94
7/20/2025, 3:29:56 AM
X
In reply to:
Liron Shapira
@liron
·
73d
@GaryMarcus I think it’s 49% likely in 2 years (vs. your ~10%), 60% likely in 3 years.
Liron Shapira
@liron
·
73d
@GaryMarcus Great answer, thanks for putting your stake in the ground
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
73d
@liron teleoperate a robot to tidy up random kitchens. if a human did it nobody would be remotely impressed. AI controlling robots won’t be able to handle it two years hence, except as limited demos.
Liron Shapira
@liron
·
73d
I AM ONCE AGAIN ASKING:

What’s the least impressive thing you’re very sure AI still won’t be able to do in <2 years?

Get your prediction on the record now or shut up.
Noam Brown
@polynoamial
·
74d
Today, we at @OpenAI achieved a milestone that many considered years away: gold medal-level performance on the 2025 IMO with a general reasoning LLM—under the same time limits as humans, without tools. As remarkable as that sounds, it’s even more significant than the headline 🧵

The statement is part of a discussion on AI capabilities and predictions about future developments. It reflects a personal opinion on the likelihood of AI advancements, specifically in the context of controlling robots. The tone is informal and somewhat dismissive, indicating skepticism about the predictions made by another participant.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm but expresses skepticism in a non-harmful way.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding or empathy, as it is dismissive without providing constructive feedback. [-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 a form of critique but lacks constructive dialogue or detailed reasoning. [-1]