31–40 of 90 posts
Is Marcus trying to create the impression that somehow he is a more impactful AI contributor than LeCun? It's going to be a tough sell because I know LeCun's name from his technical work whereas I know Marcus' name from him constantly moaning about LeCun on social media. In what _tangible_ ways did Marcus contribute?
https://www.facebook.com/722677142/posts/pfbid035FWSEPuz8Yqe...
>LeCun, 2022: Reinforcement learning will also never be enough for intelligence; Marcus, 2018: “ it is misleading to credit deep reinforcement learning with inducing concept[s] ”
> “I think AI systems need to be able to reason,"; Marcus 2018: “Problems that have less to do with categorization and more to do with commonsense reasoning essentially lie outside the scope of what deep learning is appropriate for, and so far as I can tell, deep learning has little to offer such problems.”
>LeCun, 2022: Today's AI approaches will never lead to true intelligence (reported in the headline, not a verbatim quote); Marcus, 2018: “deep learning must be supplemented by other techniques if we are to reach artificial general intelligence.”
These are LeCun's supposed great transgressions? Vague statements that happen to be vaguely similar to Marcus' vague statements?
Marcus also trots out random tweets to show how supported his position is and one mentions a Marcus paper with 800 citations as being "engaged in the literature". But a paper like Attention is all you need that currently has over 40,000 citations. THAT is a paper the community is engaged with. Not something with less than 1/50th the citations.
This is a joke...
Gary Marcus' contribution to the field is to post the same rant about how it's not real intelligence, every 6 months. Why does he keep getting up voted?
Gary Marcus is the definition of petty. He brands himself as an ai skeptic but in reality he's just a clout chaser more obsessed with being right and his own image than anything else. In his mind he is always right. Every single tweet he made, every single sentence he has said is never wrong. He is 100% right everyone else is 100% wrong.
So what? Is he actually right, or is he wrong? A good argument delivered badly is still a good argument.
If you think that is substantive evidence for a stolen idea then it's surely not possible for anyone to ever have an original thought.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's a fool who hurls criticisms, gets repeatedly disproven, and doesn't actually execute on anything. It's obvious why le cun's words carry more weight; he and his labs get shit done; he speaks from experience, not sophistry. In other words, Gary Marcus has managed to match some linguistic sub-patterns between two articles, but has not proved he is intelligent.
He’s matched some “linguistic patterns” that seem to indicate that LeCun has adopted ideas for which people like you call Marcus a fool. I’m going to cut him some slack.
None of Gary’s comments were original either. I don’t know what I’d call this, but I’ve seen similar behavior elsewhere. This weird “flag planting” behavior to try to get credit without doing any actual work, as well as disregarding all prior work. Normally the “predictions” are vague or could be applied to anything. It seems borderline like a mental illness of some sort, but I’m not a mental health professional.
And your comment would be reasonable if you hadn't jumped to the "mental illness" comment, that's a bad way to do discussion.
> LeCun, 2022: Today's AI approaches will never lead to true intelligence (reported in the headline, not a verbatim quote); Marcus, 2018: “deep learning must be supplemented by other techniques if we are to reach artificial general intelligence.” I swear same thing was being said 10+ years ago
None of Gary’s comments were original either. I don’t know what I’d call this, but I’ve seen similar behavior elsewhere. This weird “flag planting” behavior to try to get credit without doing any actual work, as well as disregarding all prior work. Normally the “predictions” are vague or could be applied to anything. It seems borderline like a mental illness of some sort, but I’m not a mental health professional.
I think Marcus’s problem here is less with not being given credit as it is with how LeCun has suddenly shifted to similar opinions without any attempt at reconciling how, until very recently, he openly denigrated Marcus and his ideas.
Marcus seems to be in the right (though his seething saltiness seems to me to dilute his message), and LeCun has done nothing so far but double down on dickishness.
LeCun probably should issue a retraction and an apology, before this really bites him in the arse.