Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 94
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
68d
The “Marcus Test” for AGI (I didn’t name it that, but it means “no AGI til Marcus says it’s AGI”) is a pretty good test for AGI.* But don’t bullshit yourself about what it is.

• It’s not about achieving a single result—I have used the word impressive (or similar) to describe
7/20/2025, 4:26:36 PM
X
In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
68d
@WesRothMoney Not only is this a fallacious argument (perhaps said in jest) but in reality the last time I said an OpenAI result was impressive wasn’t even that long ago.

it was December. And it was from OpenAI—and it (ARC-AGI w o3) didn’t even replicate!

Reality is pretty much the opposite
Wes Roth
@WesRothMoney
·
69d
AGI achieved!

This was considered by many to be the most impossible AGI standard to achieve.

Congrats to the OpenAI team, I never thought I'd see the day.

The conversation involves a debate about the achievement of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) and the validity of claims regarding its development. Gary Marcus challenges the assertion made by WesRothMoney, suggesting that the claim is fallacious and not supported by evidence. The tone is critical and aims to clarify misconceptions about AGI.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement by Gary Marcus aims to correct misinformation, aligning with the principle of doing no harm by preventing the spread of false claims. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by providing a counterpoint to the claim of AGI achievement, encouraging a more informed 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 criticism by addressing the fallacy in the argument without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]