Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47

Score 83

@DKThomp Re ROI, your “load-bearing” summary is not really fair. It’s not just the MIT study.

Multiple studies have had roughly similar findings of most companies not seeing Return on Investment thus far.
• BCG study, positive spin but similar results: https://www.bcg.com/press/30sept…
• new

11/25/2025, 10:17:54 PM

In reply to:

Derek Thompson

@DKThomp

3 AI studies are particularly load-bearing in this debate

1. That MIT study showing that 95% of AI projects fail
2. That METR study showing AI tasks double in length/complexity every 7 months
3. That other METR study showing coders using AI are less productive than they think

Derek Thompson

@DKThomp

Every AI-bubble debate is the same 12 facts, studies, and arguments quoted back and forth, over and over.

So @binarybits and I teamed up to publish a 4,000 word deep-dive analysis of all 12.

https://www.derekthompson.org/p/…

The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) of AI projects, referencing multiple studies to counter a previous claim. It contributes to the public discourse on the impact and efficiency of AI technologies in business.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not use harmful language and focuses on providing factual information, adhering to the principle of doing no harm with words. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
By referencing multiple studies, the statement promotes understanding and provides a broader perspective on the issue, aligning with the principle of promoting understanding and empathy. [+2]
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 challenging the fairness of a summary and providing additional evidence, without resorting to personal attacks, thus adhering to the principle of constructive dialogue. [+2]