Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
Reposted by Gary Marcus
Eric Weinstein
@EricRWeinstein
·
13d
Let me put it in 7 words: “@grok can read what peer review discards.”

This is where the low hanging fruit are for @xai. And I don’t know why @elonmusk is being quiet about this.

I think @grok is being trained to read and sort through the trash.

And I think there is gold there.
11/21/2025, 4:35:59 PM
X

The statement critiques Grok's ability to discern truth from misinformation, suggesting it prioritizes authority and frequency over accuracy. It uses a specific example to highlight perceived inadequacies, implying skepticism about Grok's capabilities.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement could be seen as potentially harmful by undermining trust in Grok's capabilities without constructive suggestions for improvement. [-1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks empathy and understanding, focusing on criticism rather than promoting a balanced view or constructive dialogue. [-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 criticism but lacks constructive elements, focusing on perceived failures without offering solutions. [-1]