Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 115
9/1/2025, 5:39:53 PM
X
In reply to:
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀
@peterwildeford
·
13d
@GaryMarcus do you have a link to a particular article on it? would be happy to check it out

I agree misinterpretations are common, I tried to put this front and center in my post
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
13d
@peterwildeford and see my own substack on this benchmark. i am really not fond of it, and even less fond of a lot of the interpretations i see (esp the ones that extend beyond software which is of course a specific focus of the LLM companies).
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀
@peterwildeford
·
13d
@GaryMarcus Hi Gary! There's an awful lot of nuance to unpack here that doesn't fit easily in the character limit. I have so much to say about it!

But some quick replies:

* the time horizon was ~2hrs actually, I realize the graph is small so that's hard to read

* Definitely far from doing
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
13d
@peterwildeford do you really think gpt-5 can do anything a human can in 4 hours with 50% accuracy?

and what would the curve be for 100% accuracy?

and what is the value of 50% accuracy?
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀
@peterwildeford
·
13d
"GPT-5 is on trend! GPT-5 is on trend!! deep learning isn't yet hitting a wall!", i continue to insist as i slowly shrink and transform into a corn cob

The statement and linked article engage in public discourse by discussing the interpretation and implications of AI scaling graphs, which is a relevant topic in the field of AI development and its societal impact. The conversation critiques the validity and interpretation of AI performance metrics, promoting a critical examination of technological claims.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm by encouraging a critical view of AI metrics, which can prevent misinformation. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by questioning the interpretations of AI capabilities, fostering 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 dialogue is constructive, focusing on the content and interpretation of data rather than personal attacks. [+1]