Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
11/9/2025, 6:43:59 PM
X
In reply to:
juliette pluto 🌌
@foundjuliette
·
46d
@GaryMarcus @RomeoLupascu I didn’t say current models are good enough; but models based on current architectures may become good enough.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
46d
@foundjuliette @RomeoLupascu they can’t even reliably read analog clocks or know who president is.

so i don’t actually see the argument?
juliette pluto 🌌
@foundjuliette
·
46d
@GaryMarcus @RomeoLupascu yup! agreed. and i would argue that in principle same outcome is possible with sufficiently advanced models based on current architectures.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
46d
@foundjuliette @RomeoLupascu ish. but to the extent that it does it relies heavily on the following and enforcement of rules stated symbolically.
juliette pluto 🌌
@foundjuliette
·
46d
@RomeoLupascu @GaryMarcus I hear you; and I don’t disagree on symbolic systems being far safer and more testable. That said, wouldn’t you say that humans are likewise untestable? Each individual and every new generation presents an alignment problem. and yet society functions.
Romeo Lupascu
@RomeoLupascu
·
46d
@foundjuliette @GaryMarcus There are many angles that this tech can't be constrained enough to make it safe.

When creating software (applies to hardware too) that is reliable one must ensure its total behavior is known understood and experienced at least once.

That is normally achieve in classical

The statement is part of a broader discussion on the capabilities and limitations of current AI models and architectures. It engages with public issues related to technology, AI safety, and the potential for future advancements, thus constituting public discourse. The tone is analytical and seeks to clarify a point of contention in the ongoing debate.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is part of a reasoned debate, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement seeks to promote understanding by clarifying a point in the discussion, aligning with the principle of promoting understanding and empathy. [+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 dialogue without personal attacks, adhering to the principle of constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]