“It’s not clear that RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) actually played a key role in the NYT stuff in the first place:”
Our reading:
It is not clear that retrieval augmented generation played a key role in the NYT regurgitation examples.
Assessment: Can’t be checked
What happened
Not graded on evidence
Outcome: Can’t be checked
An opinion, a recommendation, or too vague to test. Listed, not scored.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
Marcus expresses uncertainty rather than asserting that RAG was absent. The complaint distinguishes memorization examples from browsing examples. Selecting either group and turning 'not clear' into a firm technical proposition would change his claim. The earlier checkability screens therefore do not justify a true-or-false score.
Caveats
- This does not determine the actual mechanism behind any individual output.
- The complaint is used to establish the ambiguity, not to treat its technical allegations as proven.
Evidence (1 item)
Claims like this aren’t scored, so there is no evidence to show.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Observation
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Where we had to interpret
- Preserve this as an expression of uncertainty. It does not assert that RAG was absent.
- The relevant state of knowledge is that available when the post appeared on 2024-01-08.
- The speaker does not specify whether 'the NYT stuff' means Exhibit J, the browsing examples, or the complaint overall.
- Neither 'clear' nor 'key role' supplies a threshold that permits a fair binary assessment.
We don’t grade claims like this. We only check the quote and who said it.
What would settle it
A more specific statement identifying the examples and what would establish a key role could be assessed separately.
We found 15 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Marcus on AI, The desperate race to save Generative AI, paragraph 30.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-29. The post may have been edited after 2024-01-08.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Marcus on AI, The desperate race to save Generative AI
It’s not clear that RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) actually played a key role in the NYT stuff in the first place:
- Where
- paragraph 30
- Published
- 2024-01-08
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Can’t be checked. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.