Claims that can’t be checked, page 20 of 37
Claims by Gary Marcus and Ed Zitron. Deadlines are judged as of 2026-10-29.
Claims that can’t be checked (3643)
Public evidence cannot settle these claims, so they are recorded and attributed, not scored. Most were screened out: both AI providers read the claim on its own and found it a value judgment, rhetoric, hedged, too vague to test, or about something no public evidence could show. The rest were found to be recommendations or too open to test in a full review.
Page 20 of 37: claims 1901 to 2000 of 3643, ordered by the date first said, newest first. To find a claim by its words, use search.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“These models don't know anything, and thus everything they do — even "reading" and "browsing" the web — is limited by their training data and probabilistic models that can say "this is an article about a subject" and posit their relevance, but not truly understand their contents.”
Our reading: Generative AI models know nothing and cannot truly understand the content they read or browse.
No horizon
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“This is laughable on many levels, chief of which is that OpenAI, which made around twice as much revenue as Anthropic did in 2024, barely made a billion dollars from API calls in the same year.”
Our reading: Anthropic's projection that API revenue will hit $20 billion in 2027 is laughable on many levels, chiefly because OpenAI, which made about twice Anthropic's revenue in 2024, barely made a billion dollars from API calls that year.
No horizon
Qualifier: OpenAI barely made about $1bn from API calls in 2024
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“Deep Research is the AI slop of academia — low-quality research-slop built for people that don't really care about quality or substance, and it’s not immediately obvious who it’s for.”
Our reading: Deep Research produces low-quality research slop with no clear audience.
No horizon
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“That may very likely mean Anthropic burned more money than OpenAI somehow last year! These companies are absolutely atrocious at business!”
Our reading: Anthropic very likely burned more money than OpenAI in 2024, and both are atrocious at business.
No horizon
Qualifier: per The Information figures
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“To break this down, Altman is describing his next model — GPT 4.5 — as launching in some indeterminate timeframe and doing something probably quite similar to the current GPT 4o model.”
Our reading: GPT-4.5 will probably do something quite similar to GPT-4o.
No horizon
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“It’s quintessential LLM copy — soulless and almost, but not quite, right.”
Our reading: Deep Research's writing is quintessential LLM copy, soulless and almost, but not quite, right.
No horizon
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“And even then, we still don't have a killer app! There is no product that everybody loves, and there is no iPhone moment!”
Our reading: Generative AI has no killer app or iPhone moment despite massive investment.
No horizon
Qualifier: despite over $200bn hyperscaler capex and a third of VC investment
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“Deep Research repeatedly citing SEO-bait as a primary source proves that these models, even when grinding their gears as hard as humanely possible, are exceedingly mediocre, deeply untrustworthy, and ultimately useless.”
Our reading: Deep Research repeatedly citing SEO-bait as a primary source proves that these models, even when working as hard as possible, are exceedingly mediocre, deeply untrustworthy and ultimately useless.
No horizon
Qualifier: even when grinding their gears as hard as humanely possible
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“Dario Amodei — much like Sam Altman — is a liar, a crook, a carnival barker and a charlatan, and the things he promises are equal parts ridiculous and offensive.”
Our reading: Dario Amodei, like Sam Altman, is a liar, a crook, a carnival barker and a charlatan, and the things he promises are equal parts ridiculous and offensive.
No horizon
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“It's been just over two years and two months since ChatGPT launched, and in that time we've seen Large Language Models (LLMs) blossom from a novel concept into one of the most craven cons of the 21st century — a cynical bubble inflated by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman built to sell into an economy run by people that have no concept of labor other than their desperation to exploit or replace it.”
Our reading: In the just over two years since ChatGPT launched, LLMs have gone from a novel concept to one of the most craven cons of the 21st century: a cynical bubble inflated by Sam Altman, built to sell into an economy run by people whose only idea of labor is a desperate wish to exploit or replace it.
No horizon
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“When you put aside the hype and anecdotes, generative AI has languished in the same place, even in my kindest estimations, for several months, though it's really been years.”
Our reading: Putting aside the hype and anecdotes, generative AI has languished in the same place for several months even by his kindest estimate, though really for years.
No horizon
Qualifier: when you put aside the hype and anecdotes
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“$3.25 billion a quarter is absolutely pathetic.”
Our reading: Microsoft's roughly $3.25 billion a quarter in AI revenue is absolutely pathetic.
No horizon
Qualifier: compared with $69.63bn quarterly revenue and $15.80bn capex
Source: The Generative AI Con
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“This is not where we should be as a nation.”
Our reading: The US should not be deploying biased, unreliable AI in government under Musk's influence.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“The problem here, by the way, isn’t just the blatant propaganda, but the more subtle stuff, that people may not even notice.”
Our reading: The problem with Grok is not just its blatant propaganda but also more subtle content that people may not even notice.
No horizon
Qualifier: people may not even notice
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Rhetoric
“This isn’t free speech. It’s a massive, massive thumb on the scale, from one of the most powerful yet unelected people in the world.”
Our reading: Grok's biased outputs are not free speech but a massive manipulation of public opinion by Musk.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Everyone—and not just The Information—should be genuinely terrified that the richest man in the world has built a Large Language Model that spouts propaganda in his image.”
Our reading: Everyone, not just The Information, should be genuinely terrified that the richest man in the world (Elon Musk) has built a large language model that spouts propaganda in his image.
No horizon
Scope: everyone, not just The Information
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“If Altman knew how to build AGI, he would build it. Instead, he rechristened Orion as GPT 4.5 rather than 5, which likely means that despite major bills, Orion never met the expectations so-called scaling laws had implied.”
Our reading: Altman does not know how to build AGI, and Orion likely never met the expectations implied by scaling laws despite major costs.
No horizon
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“All this time, it turns out, Altman was bluffing.”
Our reading: Sam Altman's comments implying progress toward AGI were a bluff.
No horizon
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Neurosymbolic AI, which I have long championed, may turn out to be part of the mix.”
Our reading: Neurosymbolic AI may be part of the eventual route to AGI.
No horizon
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If they called Orion GPT-5, reactions would likely converge for many on “is that all there is?”. OpenAI’s mystique might well take a serious hit.”
Our reading: If OpenAI called Orion GPT-5, many would likely react with disappointment and OpenAI's mystique might take a serious hit.
No horizon
Only if: if Orion were called GPT-5
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“The company’s future rests on them doing something truly revolutionary, and Orion turns out not to be that.”
Our reading: OpenAI's future depends on something revolutionary, and Orion is not revolutionary.
No horizon
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“In all likelihood AGI will some day arrive, with or without LLMs at the core, and likely with all kinds of other gadgets included.”
Our reading: AGI will likely arrive some day, likely incorporating many components beyond LLMs.
No horizon
Qualifier: with or without LLMs at the core
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Scaling is useful, but it is not now and never was the whole answer.”
Our reading: Scaling is useful but is not, and never was, sufficient on its own to reach AGI.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The case cites no evidence items, so this record does not establish whether AGI has been reached or how.
Source: Breaking: OpenAI's efforts at pure scaling have hit a wall.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“By turning down Musk’s bid, Altman makes it hard to justify paying the nonprofit anything less than the $97B that was just offered.”
Our reading: As his best guess about the subtext, with no promises that he is right, Marcus says that by turning down Musk's bid, Altman makes it hard to justify paying OpenAI's nonprofit anything less than the $97B just offered.
No horizon
Only if: Altman turned down Musk's bid
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Altman desperately needs to ditch the OpenAI nonprofit. It’s become an albatross around his neck.”
Our reading: Sam Altman urgently needs to get rid of OpenAI's nonprofit control structure, which has become a burden to him.
No horizon
Qualifier: offered as best guess about subtext
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“All of this has the effect of potentially slowing down Musk’s competitor Altman, who can ill afford an extra $50B+ outlay given his current cash flow situation.”
Our reading: Musk's bid may slow down Altman/OpenAI, which can ill afford an extra $50B+ outlay given its cash flow.
No horizon
Qualifier: given current cash flow situation
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“Roughly speaking, this means that (at little real cost, since the bid was never going to be accepted) Musk has more than doubled the cost of OpenAI for-profit’s freedom.”
Our reading: As his best guess, roughly speaking, Marcus says Musk has more than doubled the cost of the OpenAI for-profit's freedom from the nonprofit, at little real cost to himself, since the bid was never going to be accepted.
No horizon
Qualifier: roughly speaking
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If AI has significant negative externalities upon the world, we the citizens are screwed.”
Our reading: If AI has significant negative externalities upon the world, we the citizens are screwed.
No horizon
Only if: if AI has significant negative externalities upon the world
Source: Everything I warned about in Taming Silicon Valley is rapidly becoming our reality
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“He’s absolutely right, we should worry about authoritarian uses of AI.”
Our reading: We should worry about authoritarian uses of AI.
No horizon
Source: Everything I warned about in Taming Silicon Valley is rapidly becoming our reality
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Right now, it isn’t.”
Our reading: At present, AI is not working for the public.
No horizon
Source: Everything I warned about in Taming Silicon Valley is rapidly becoming our reality
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“Unless we speak up very, very loudly, it won’t.”
Our reading: Unless citizens speak up very loudly, AI will not come to work for the public.
No horizon
Only if: unless citizens speak up very loudly
Source: Everything I warned about in Taming Silicon Valley is rapidly becoming our reality
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“They’re everywhere, and they are real, meaningful stories, ones that are more important than Anthropic’s Dario Amodei farting into a microphone about how AI will be smarter than humans at some point!”
Our reading: Everyday problems with consumer software are real, meaningful stories that are more important than Dario Amodei talking about how AI will be smarter than humans at some point.
No horizon
Source: What We're Fighting For
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“To this day I still can’t find a single journalist who has a cogent explanation as to why ChatGPT is big, other than the fact that lots of people use it.”
Our reading: To this day, Zitron says he still can't find a single journalist with a cogent explanation of why ChatGPT is big, other than the fact that lots of people use it.
No horizon
Qualifier: based on his own search ('I still can't find')
Source: What We're Fighting For
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Causal claim
“Generative AI would never have been any kind of “movement” or “industry” if the media had approached it from the perspective of a consumer and said “okay, sure, but what does this actually do?” and the same goes for both the metaverse and cryptocurrency.”
Our reading: Generative AI would never have become any kind of 'movement' or 'industry' if the media had approached it from a consumer's perspective and asked what it actually does, and the same goes for the metaverse and cryptocurrency.
No horizon
Qualifier: counterfactual: if the media had approached it from a consumer perspective and asked what it actually does
Source: What We're Fighting For
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Regulatory capture seemed huge:”
Our reading: Amid the complaints about the Paris AI Summit's leaked draft statement, regulatory capture seemed huge.
No horizon
Qualifier: seemed
Source: Paris AI Summit Train Wreck
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“It would accomplish little, and let too many people off the hook, allowing them to say that they had addressed AI risks without actually doing all that much.”
Our reading: If the draft Paris AI Summit statement were signed, it would accomplish little and would let too many people off the hook, allowing them to say they had addressed AI risks without actually doing all that much.
No horizon
Only if: if the draft statement is signed
Source: Paris AI Summit Train Wreck
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Considering all the big names that were assembled, this all feels like a wasted opportunity.”
Our reading: Considering all the big names assembled, the Paris AI Summit feels like a wasted opportunity.
No horizon
Scope: considering all the big names that were assembled
Source: Paris AI Summit Train Wreck
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“I tend to agree with those that feel that the draft should not be signed.”
Our reading: Marcus leans toward the view that the Paris AI Summit draft statement should not be signed.
No horizon
Source: Paris AI Summit Train Wreck
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“People have been adding data and compute left and right since August 2022 when OpenAI demo’d GPT-4 to Bill Gates, but despite literally hundreds of billions of investment, pure LLM scaling has not produced the fruit some people imagined.”
Our reading: Despite hundreds of billions invested since August 2022, pure LLM scaling has not delivered what some expected.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: This is not a finding that scaling met expectations or that the investment amount was false.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Another of the key suggestions I made in 2022 was that we should use neurosymbolic techniques, combining neural networks with classical symbolic techniques such as rules.”
Our reading: AI should combine neural networks with classical symbolic techniques such as rules.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“We got one more huge advance since the 2022 paper (I was agnostic then as to how many more leaps there would be), but we still don’t have a system that would really merit the name of GPT-5.”
Our reading: Since 2022 there has been one more huge advance but no system that merits the name GPT-5.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Rhetoric
“So much for exponential progress.”
Our reading: Google repeating the same kind of LLM error two years apart mocks claims of exponential progress in AI.
No horizon
Qualifier: sarcastic remark
Source: Shame on Google, twice
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Rhetoric
“Let that be a lesson to all AI developers. What’s been released cannot be unreleased.”
Our reading: What has been released cannot be unreleased, and AI developers should take that as a lesson.
No horizon
Scope: all AI developers
Source: Irony too funny for words
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“That news confirms something I have long feared; no matter how much you must trust a company or its management, things can eventually change.”
Our reading: The news of Google's change confirms Marcus's long-held fear that, no matter how much you must trust a company or its management, things can eventually change.
No horizon
Scope: any company or its management, regardless of how much it is trusted
Source: Google, 2001: Don’t Be Evil
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“(In fairness, ChatGPT doesn’t really lie; it just spews text that often bears little resemblance to reality, but you get my drift).”
Our reading: ChatGPT does not truly lie, but it often produces text that bears little resemblance to reality.
No horizon
Source: ChatGPT in Shambles
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“As against all the constant claims of exponential progress that I see practically every day, ChatGPT still seems likes pretty much the same mix of brilliance and stupidity that I wrote about, more than two years ago:”
Our reading: Despite constant claims of exponential progress, ChatGPT still seems like pretty much the same mix of brilliance and stupidity that Marcus wrote about more than two years earlier.
No horizon
Qualifier: still seems like
Source: ChatGPT in Shambles
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“But it is not just s scammers; the larger problem may be naive people who believe that the outputs are legit, or who use it as a shortcut for writing journal articles, missing the errors it produces.”
Our reading: The larger problem with Deep Research may be naive people who trust its outputs or use it to write journal articles, missing its errors.
No horizon
Source: Deep Research, Deep Bullshit, and the potential (model) collapse of science
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Amodei is correct that DeepSeek didn't do anything in terms of cost reductions that wouldn't have happened here before too long, anyway.”
Our reading: DeepSeek's cost reductions were ones US labs would have achieved before long anyway.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“We should be thinking about how to sponsor innovation, and recognize that the best funded companies aren't always the most innovative. Going all in on them is a mistake.”
Our reading: We should be thinking about how to sponsor innovation and recognize that the best-funded companies aren't always the most innovative, and going all in on them is a mistake.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“The country that does its best to develop a new tech that is more reliable and more difficult to replicate will win.”
Our reading: The country that does its best to develop new AI technology that is more reliable and harder to replicate than LLMs will win the race.
No horizon
Only if: does its best to develop a new tech that is more reliable and harder to replicate
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“(Still embarrassing to the US giants though that a leaner, hungrier startup abroad got there first.)”
Our reading: It is still embarrassing to the US AI giants that a leaner, hungrier startup abroad (DeepSeek) got there first on cost reductions.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Amodei's biggest advantage is having more chips, and I understand him wanting to prosecute that advantage, but what we really need are better ideas, and the oxygen for innovative startups to breathe.”
Our reading: Anthropic's main advantage is having more chips, but AI progress really needs better ideas and room for innovative startups.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“My takeaway is different: the LLM race is an enormously expensive effort to win a race that can no longer be won.”
Our reading: The LLM race is enormously expensive and can no longer be won by any country.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“DeepSeek definitely has him rattled. The piece is a long and articulate, but also quite defensive.”
Our reading: Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei is rattled by DeepSeek, and his essay is defensive.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“This seems plausible. DeepSeek may well have broken OpenAI’s Terms of Service and distilled1 their intellectual property without permission.”
Our reading: It is plausible that DeepSeek broke OpenAI's Terms of Service by distilling OpenAI's models without permission.
No horizon
Source: OpenAI Cries Foul
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Rhetoric
“Karma is a bitch.”
Our reading: OpenAI being copied by DeepSeek is karmic payback for its own use of others' IP.
No horizon
Source: OpenAI Cries Foul
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“OpenAI may well have done analogous things to YouTube, New York Times, and countless artists and writers.”
Our reading: OpenAI may well have used content from YouTube, the New York Times, and many artists and writers without permission, much as DeepSeek allegedly did to OpenAI.
No horizon
Source: OpenAI Cries Foul
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“It’s all been a con, a painfully-obvious one, one I’ve been screaming about since February 2024, trying to explain that beneath the hype was an industry that provided modest-at-best outcomes rather than resembling any kind of “next big thing.””
Our reading: The generative AI industry has been a con delivering modest-at-best outcomes.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“As I’ve said before, I believe we’re at peak AI, and now that generative AI has been commoditized, the only thing that OpenAI and Anthropic have left is their ability to innovate, which I’m not sure they’re capable of doing.”
Our reading: We are at peak AI, and OpenAI and Anthropic may not be capable of the innovation they now depend on.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“This doesn’t mean that we know for a fact that DeepSeek distilled 4o or Claude, but frankly, it would be odd if they didn’t.”
Our reading: DeepSeek likely distilled GPT-4o or Claude, though this is not known for certain.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Causal claim
“It’s not essential, and it’s only been treated as such because the media (and the markets) ran away with a narrative they barely understood.”
Our reading: ChatGPT is not essential and has only been treated as essential because the media and markets ran away with a narrative they barely understood.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“I could absolutely see Meta releasing its own version of DeepSeek’s models — it has the GPUs and Zuckerberg can never be fired, meaning that if he decided to simply throw billions of dollars into specifically creating his own deep-discounted LLMs to wipe out OpenAI he absolutely could.”
Our reading: He could absolutely see Meta releasing its own version of DeepSeek's models, and if Zuckerberg decided to throw billions into deep-discounted LLMs to wipe out OpenAI, he absolutely could.
No horizon
Qualifier: wiping out OpenAI depends on Zuckerberg deciding to commit billions
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“I’d argue that despite the significant price difference between o1 and DeepSeek’s r1 reasoning model, the real danger to both OpenAI and Anthropic is DeepSeek v3, which competes with GPT-4o.”
Our reading: He would argue that, despite the large price difference between o1 and R1, the real danger to OpenAI and Anthropic is DeepSeek V3, which competes with GPT-4o.
No horizon
Qualifier: I'd argue
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“In any case, if I had to guess, the result will be the markets accepting that generative AI isn’t the future.”
Our reading: His guess is that markets will come to accept that generative AI is not the future.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“Post-DeepSeek, there isn’t really a compelling argument for investing hundreds of billions of capital expenditures in data centers, buying new GPUs, or even pursuing Large Language Models as they currently stand.”
Our reading: After DeepSeek, there is no compelling argument for hundreds of billions in data center capex, new GPUs, or current-style LLMs.
No horizon
Qualifier: post-DeepSeek
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Causal claim
“As I've written before, OpenAI simply burns money, has been allowed to burn money, and up until recently likely would've been allowed to burn even more money, because everybody — all of the American model developers — appeared to agree that the only way to develop Large Language Models was to make the models as big as humanly possible, and work out troublesome stuff like "making them profitable" later”
Our reading: OpenAI burns money, has been allowed to, and until recently likely would have been allowed to burn even more, because all American model developers appeared to agree that the only way to develop LLMs was to make them as big as possible and work out profitability later.
No horizon
Qualifier: appeared to agree
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Conditional forecast
“Synthetic data might work where the output is something that you could figure out on a TI-83 calculator, but when you get into anything a bit more fuzzy (like written text, or anything with an element of analysis) you’ll likely start to encounter unhappy side effects..”
Our reading: Synthetic training data may work for unambiguous domains like math but will likely cause bad side effects for fuzzy domains like text or analysis.
No horizon
Only if: for fuzzy domains like written text or analysis
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Causal claim
“My mistake was — if you can believe this — being too generous to the AI companies, assuming that they didn’t pursue efficiency because they couldn’t, and not because they couldn’t be bothered.”
Our reading: He says he was too generous in assuming that AI companies didn't pursue efficiency because they couldn't, when potentially they didn't because they couldn't be bothered.
No horizon
Qualifier: 'potentially, nobody was trying' (preceding hedge)
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Causal claim
“Putting aside my personal beliefs for a second, it’s fairly obvious why these companies wouldn’t want to create something like DeepSeek — because creating an open source model that uses less resources means that OpenAI, Anthropic and their associated hyperscalers would lose their soft monopoly on Large Language Models.”
Our reading: It is fairly obvious that OpenAI, Anthropic and their hyperscalers wouldn't want to create something like DeepSeek, because an efficient open-source model would cost them their soft monopoly on LLMs.
No horizon
Qualifier: fairly obvious
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“In an AI context, reasoning works by breaking down a prompt into a series of different steps with "considerations" of different approaches — effectively a Large Language Model checking its work as it goes, with no thinking involved, because these models do not "think" or "know" stuff.”
Our reading: AI reasoning models do not think or know anything; reasoning is an LLM checking its work step by step.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“Nevertheless, OpenAI and Anthropic both have enough money and hiring power to have tried — and succeeded — in creating a model this efficient and capable of running on older GPUs, except what they actually wanted was more rapacious growth and the chance to build even bigger data centers with even more compute.”
Our reading: OpenAI and Anthropic had the resources to build a model as efficient as DeepSeek's but preferred growth and bigger data centers.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“OpenAI has pledged $19 billion to fund the "Stargate" data center — an amount it is somehow going to raise through further debt and equity raises, despite the fact that it’s likely already in the process of raising another round as we speak just to keep the company afloat.”
Our reading: OpenAI is likely already raising another funding round just to stay afloat, on top of its $19 billion Stargate pledge.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Conditional forecast
“If OpenAI wants to do its own cheaper, more-efficient model, it’ll likely have to create it from scratch, and while it could do distillation to make it "more OpenAI-like" using OpenAI's own models, that's effectively what DeepSeek already did.”
Our reading: If OpenAI wants a cheaper, efficient model, it will likely have to build it from scratch.
No horizon
Only if: if OpenAI wants a cheaper, more efficient model
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“Even OpenAI’s push into the federal government, with the release of ChatGPT Gov, is unlikely to reverse its dismal fortunes.”
Our reading: ChatGPT Gov is unlikely to reverse OpenAI's dismal financial fortunes.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“Fundamentally, the magic has died. There’s no halo around Sam Altman or Dario Amodei’s head anymore, as their only real argument was “we’re the only ones that can do this,” something that nobody should’ve believed in the first place.”
Our reading: Altman and Amodei have lost their aura because their claim to be uniquely capable has been disproven.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Causal claim
“Large Language Models are, in and of themselves, a fairly bland software product, which is why we’re yet to see any killer apps.”
Our reading: LLMs are a bland software product, which is why no killer apps have emerged.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“At this point, it's fairly obvious that OpenAI wasn’t anywhere near the “forefront of AI development,” and now that its competitive advantage is effectively gone, there are genuine doubts about what comes next for the company.”
Our reading: It is fairly obvious that OpenAI wasn't anywhere near the forefront of AI development, its competitive advantage is now effectively gone, and there are genuine doubts about what comes next for the company.
No horizon
Qualifier: fairly obvious
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Conditional forecast
“Even with OpenAI's much larger team and more powerful hardware, it's hard to see how creating a smaller, more-efficient, and almost-as-powerful version of o1 benefits the company, because said version has, well, already been beaten to market by DeepSeek, and thanks to DeepSeek will almost certainly have a great deal of competition for a product that, to this day, lacks any real killer apps.”
Our reading: If OpenAI builds a smaller, more efficient, almost-as-powerful o1, it is hard to see how that benefits the company, because DeepSeek has already beaten it to market and it will almost certainly face a great deal of competition for a product that still lacks killer apps.
No horizon
Only if: OpenAI creates a smaller, more efficient version of o1
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“It still isn't clear if these models are going to be profitable — as discussed, it's unclear who funds DeepSeek and whether its current pricing is sustainable — but they are likely going to be a damn sight more profitable than anything OpenAI is flogging.”
Our reading: DeepSeek's models are likely to be much more profitable than OpenAI's products, though their profitability is uncertain.
No horizon
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“Let's be frank: these companies aren't building shit. OpenAI and Anthropic are both limply throwing around the idea that "agents are possible" in an attempt to raise more money to burn, and after the launch of DeepSeek, I have to wonder what any investor thinks they're investing in.”
Our reading: OpenAI and Anthropic 'aren't building shit' and are limply floating the idea that agents are possible in an attempt to raise more money to burn, leaving him to wonder after DeepSeek what investors think they are investing in.
No horizon
Qualifier: in an attempt to
Source: Deep Impact
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“DeepSeek is an economic revolution, and geopolitical wake-up call, but that doesn't directly bring us any closer to AGI.”
Our reading: DeepSeek is an economic revolution and a geopolitical wake-up call.
No horizon
Source: Five things most people don't seem to understand about DeepSeek
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Furthermore, unlike some companies I could name, DeepSeek is actually, well, Open, which may help them lure talent from more walled off operations..”
Our reading: Because DeepSeek is actually open, unlike some other companies, its openness may help it lure talent from more walled-off operations.
No horizon
Qualifier: because DeepSeek is actually open
Source: Five things most people don't seem to understand about DeepSeek
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“GenAI economics could get wild.”
Our reading: The economics of generative AI could get wild.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Putting so many eggs in Altman’s basket, as the White House did last week and others have before, may also prove to be a mistake in hindsight.”
Our reading: The White House's heavy reliance on Altman may prove a mistake in hindsight.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“One that deserves Congressional investigation was Meta's decision to open source their LLMs.”
Our reading: Congress should investigate how Meta's open-sourcing of its LLMs helped China catch up.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“(Trump’s boosting of Stargate seemingly fits with the same magical thinking in LLMs, premised on the same hope of achieving a supremacy that may never come).”
Our reading: Trump's boosting of Stargate seemingly fits with the same magical thinking about LLMs, premised on the hope of achieving a supremacy that may never come.
No horizon
Qualifier: seemingly
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Altman may be a master salesman, but Musk is correct that the US should not be so reliant on him and should not have given him such an eminent seal of approval based on so little.”
Our reading: Marcus agrees with Musk that the US should not be so reliant on Altman and should not have given him such an eminent seal of approval based on so little.
No horizon
Qualifier: based on so little
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“I have said it before, and I will say it again—OpenAI may well become the WeWork of AI.”
Our reading: OpenAI may well become the WeWork of AI.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The race to AGI will be won not by the country with the most chips but by the one that best fosters true innovation.”
Our reading: The country that best fosters true innovation, not the one with the most chips, will win the race to AGI.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“Others may catch up, too, because LLMs just got a lot cheaper, and consequently the requirement for vast arrays of special purpose hardware has somewhat diminished.”
Our reading: Because LLMs got much cheaper and need less special hardware, other players may catch up.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If all this is true, the CHIPS Act, which was designed to slow China in the AI race, may turn out to be one of the worst backfires in history.”
Our reading: If all this is true, the CHIPS Act, which was designed to slow China in the AI race, may turn out to be one of the worst backfires in history.
No horizon
Only if: if all this is true
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If the race to LLMs continues to be unregulated in the US, and LLMs remain detached from reality, rushed development cycles and intense global competition might well exacerbate risks of misinformation, biased outputs, privacy breaches, and misuse by malicious actors.”
Our reading: If the LLM race stays unregulated in the US and LLMs remain detached from reality, rushed development cycles and intense global competition might well worsen the risks of misinformation, biased outputs, privacy breaches and misuse by malicious actors.
No horizon
Only if: the race to LLMs continues to be unregulated in the US
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Building $500B worth of power and data centers in the service of enormous collections of those chips isn't looking so sensible, either.”
Our reading: Building $500B worth of power and data centers to serve enormous collections of top Nvidia chips isn't looking so sensible either.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Furthermore, as I have argued for years, LLMs are too opaque, too unwieldy, and too difficult to debug and verify. The answer lies elsewhere; betting our future on that single idea is foolish.”
Our reading: LLMs are too opaque, unwieldy and hard to debug and verify, so betting the future on them is foolish.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“And maybe kneecapped our greatest silicon company, Nvidia.”
Our reading: US export controls may have kneecapped Nvidia.
No horizon
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Nvidia could soon take a serious hit, too, for two reasons. First, the DeepSeek results suggest that large language models might be trained far more efficiently going forward.”
Our reading: Nvidia could soon take a serious hit because LLMs may be trainable far more efficiently.
No horizon
Qualifier: LLMs can be trained far more efficiently
Source: The race for "AI Supremacy" is over — at least for now.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Like a lot of what Sam says, this is based on the conjecture, or in this case multiple conjectures:”
Our reading: Altman's claim that Stargate will be great for the country rests on several conjectures, as much of what he says does.
No horizon
Source: Hot take on an AI catfight
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“The equally speculative conjecture that the U.S. will long term have an advantage over China if the U.S. builds the hypothesized infrastructure, as if China isn’t trying to build the same.”
Our reading: The idea that building the infrastructure will give the U.S. a long-term AI advantage over China is speculative, since China is trying to build the same.
No horizon
Qualifier: if the U.S. builds the infrastructure
Source: Hot take on an AI catfight
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“The entirely speculative conjecture that LLMs or something else OpenAI figures out how to be build will be enormously profitable.”
Our reading: The idea that LLMs or other OpenAI technology will be enormously profitable is entirely speculative.
No horizon
Source: Hot take on an AI catfight
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Elon thinks Sam is playing the same move that they once played together. He could be right.”
Our reading: Musk could be right that Altman is overstating the Stargate funding, the same way OpenAI's original $1B funding claim was overstated.
No horizon
Source: Hot take on an AI catfight