> then it has an inline link to the JAMA study. Both CNN and Fox do similarly! I thought he was pretty clearly saying the JAMA study in his example would be ma

> then it has an inline link to the JAMA study. Both CNN and Fox do similarly! I thought he was pretty clearly saying the JAMA study in his example would be made up by chatgpt. I've seen it make up lots of fake citatations so maybe I just had that back of mind and assumed wrong? > Gary Marcus doesn't realize that spewing 10,000 erroneous COVID vaccine efficacy news articles isn't among them. He caveated in the interview about this one or a similar one that the safety filter may stop it. > Anyone who blindly trusts what they read on Twitter or Facebook has bigger problems than ChatGPT. How naive does Gary think people are?! He's clearly saying it is a matter of degree when he details the submachinegun analogy to it, and a matter of cost when he compares actual costs of a human troll-farm. I think he was wrong about several things, mostly in dismissing and its generalization ability and ability to come up with abstract metaphors related to the text, etc., but I don't think your comment is being very fair to him.