Elon Musk: 1; Yann LeCun: 1; Humanity: 0
We recorded 8 claims from this post. 2 were checked against evidence. 6 can’t be checked. 3 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (8)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“we need more science if we are to get to AGI.”
Our reading: Reaching AGI requires more basic science.
No horizon
Qualifier: if AGI is to be reached
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Right now we have a lot of engineering and alchemy, but not enough basic principles and formal understanding.”
Our reading: Right now AI has a lot of engineering and alchemy but not enough basic principles and formal understanding.
No horizon
Scope: right now
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“AI needs more science, but it needs engineering, too.”
Our reading: AI needs more science as well as engineering.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“On the other hand, the chatbots of both X.ai and Meta still seem to me to be wildly inadequate, hallucinatory machines that merely hint at what AI could be, but with precious little understanding of the concepts underlying the words they so fluently use.”
Our reading: To Marcus, the chatbots of X.ai and Meta still seem to be wildly inadequate, hallucinatory machines that merely hint at what AI could be and have precious little understanding of the concepts behind the words they fluently use.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: This does not reject or vindicate the factual allegation that the chatbots hallucinated.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“And oops, Grok’s basic understanding of time is shaky, too:”
Our reading: Grok has a shaky basic understanding of time.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: A missing public test is not evidence that Grok performed well.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Both Musk and LeCun (via Meta) command massive budgets to explore AI; I am not convinced that either is making real progress.”
Our reading: Marcus is not convinced that either Musk's xAI or Meta is making real AI progress despite massive budgets.
No horizon
Qualifier: despite massive budgets
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“Musk is just building bigger and bigger LLMs, and Meta is mostly (despite LeCun’s reservations) mostly doing the same.”
Our reading: Musk's xAI is just building bigger LLMs, and Meta is mostly doing the same.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: Public announcements do not provide a complete account of internal research.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Musk and LeCun may have the soapboxes and the money, but what we really need is a breakthrough.”
Our reading: What AI really needs is a breakthrough, not just money and publicity.
No horizon
Held from this post (3)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Based on trying it yesterday, Marcus says Grok has its moments but can be pretty dismal too.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: Grok is frequently wrong, gives inconsistent answers to the same question, and is never in doubt.