Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 97
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
66d
selfish. questionable. on brand.
7/20/2025, 7:44:47 PM
X
In reply to:
Jasper
@zjasper666
·
66d
We might be heading into a plot twist in the OpenAI vs. DeepMind IMO saga.

Just saw a post from Joseph Myers (involved in the Math Olympiad since 1992): the IMO committee reportedly asked AI labs not to publish results until 7 days after the closing ceremony — out of respect for
Jasper
@zjasper666
·
67d
DeepMind got a gold medal at the IMO on Friday afternoon. But they had to wait for marketing to approve the tweet — until Monday.

@OpenAI shared theirs first at 1am on Saturday and stole the spotlight.

In this game, speed > bureaucracy. Miss the moment, lose the narrative.

The statement and related conversation discuss the ethical considerations and competitive dynamics between AI companies and human participants in the International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO). The focus is on the timing of announcements by AI companies, which may overshadow human achievements. The discourse highlights concerns about respect, fairness, and the impact of AI on traditional competitions.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement raises concerns about potential harm caused by AI companies overshadowing human achievements, suggesting a violation of the principle to do no harm. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The discussion respects the privacy and dignity of human participants by advocating for a delay in AI announcements to maintain focus on human achievements. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding and empathy by highlighting the importance of recognizing human efforts in competitions. [+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.
    The discourse engages in constructive criticism of AI companies' actions, encouraging a dialogue on ethical practices. [+1]