3 ms·
Gary Marcus always, always says AI doesn't actually work - it's his whole thing. If he's posted a correct argument it's a coincidence. I remember seeing him cla
by astrange 1y ago
Gary Marcus always, always says AI doesn't actually work - it's his whole thing. If he's posted a correct argument it's a coincidence. I remember seeing him claim real long-time AI researchers like David Chapman (who's a critic himself) were wrong anytime they say anything positive.
(em-dash avoided to look less AI)
Of course, the main issue with the field is the critics /should/ be correct. Like, LLMs shouldn't work and nobody knows why they work. But they do anyway.
So you end up with critics complaining it's "just a parrot" and then patting themselves on the back, as if inventing a parrot isn't supposed to be impressive somehow.
- foldr 1y agoI don’t read GM as saying that LLMs “don’t work” in a practical sense. He acknowledges that they have useful applications. Indeed, if they didn’t work at all, why would he be advocating for regulating their use? He just doesn’t think they’re close to AGI.
- kadushka 1y agoThe funny thing is, if you asked “what is AGI” 5 years ago, most people would describe something like o3.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- foldr 1y agoEven Sam Altman thinks we’re not at AGI yet (although of course it’s coming “soon”).
- kadushka 1y agoMarkus has been consistently wrong over the many years predicting the (lack of) progress of the current deep learning methods. Altman has been correct so far.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- foldr 1y agoMarcus has made some good predictions and some bad ones. That’s usually the way with people who make specific predictions — there are no prophets. Not sure I’d agree that SA has been any more consistently right. You can easily find examples of overconfidence from him (though he rarely says anything specific enough to count as a prediction).