Claims that can’t be checked, page 31 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 31 of 37: claims 3001 to 3100 of 3643, ordered by the date first said, newest first. To find a claim by its words, use search.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If the EU does not find a compromise, we are all in trouble; the only beneficiaries will be the largest companies who are least in need of help.”
Our reading: If the EU fails to reach a compromise on the AI Act, everyone will be in trouble and only the largest AI companies will benefit.
No horizon
Only if: the EU does not find a compromise
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“We should not allow that to stand.”
Our reading: Society should not allow big tech to exempt generative AI from regulation.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“In the worst case, after five years of negotiation, we could wind up with nothing, leaving the citizens of the world more or less1 entirely on the hook for any negative externalities that arise from generative AI, from misinformation to cybercrime to new bioweapons to bias; runaway AI, if it’s really a thing, would also not be covered.”
Our reading: In the worst case the EU AI Act negotiations could produce nothing, leaving citizens largely unprotected from generative AI's negative externalities.
No horizon
Qualifier: in the worst case
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The EU needs to cut a deal.”
Our reading: The EU needs to reach a compromise deal on its AI Act.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“So the obvious and correct compromise, which the Spanish government has been trying to push, is a “tiered approach” to try to put the greatest burden on the largest companies.”
Our reading: The EU AI Act should adopt a tiered approach putting the greatest regulatory burden on the largest foundation model companies.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“If you know anyone in the EU government, now is the time to let them know that you don’t want big tech to run the world.”
Our reading: People who know anyone in the EU government should tell them now that they do not want big tech to run the world.
No horizon
Scope: if you know anyone in the EU government
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“AI definitely should not aspire to replicate the human mind in every detail.”
Our reading: AI should not aim to replicate the human mind in every detail.
No horizon
Qualifier: in every detail
Source: AI versus The Clumsy Human Mind
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The sooner we realize that humans and silicon machines are importantly different, the better.”
Our reading: People should recognize, as soon as possible, that humans and silicon machines are importantly different.
No horizon
Source: AI versus The Clumsy Human Mind
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“For now, humans aren’t more intelligent than machines or vice versa, we are just differently abled.”
Our reading: As of November 2023, neither humans nor machines are more intelligent overall; they have different abilities.
No horizon
Qualifier: for now
Source: AI versus The Clumsy Human Mind
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“It made my day because that’s what I’ve been trying to teach everyone, for a long time: we can probably make machines better if we spend time first thinking about human minds (both their strengths and their weaknesses).”
Our reading: We can probably make machines better if we first spend time thinking about human minds, both their strengths and their weaknesses.
No horizon
Qualifier: probably
Source: AI versus The Clumsy Human Mind
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“That’s what AGI should be: something that solves our problems for us (rather than creating new ones).”
Our reading: AGI should be a reliable, hallucination-free system that solves human problems rather than creating new ones.
No horizon
Source: AI versus The Clumsy Human Mind
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The point of AI should not be to replicate us, but to supplement us, where we are cognitively frail (calculators are great at that! and spreadsheets! and databases!), and to pitch where we would prefer not to go, helping us, for example, with jobs that robotics call “dull, dirty, and dangerous”.”
Our reading: AI should aim to supplement humans where they are cognitively weak and take on dull, dirty, and dangerous work, not replicate humans.
No horizon
Source: AI versus The Clumsy Human Mind
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“We are probably still many “breakthroughs” away from true level 5 driverless cars.”
Our reading: True level 5 driverless cars are probably still many breakthroughs away.
No horizon
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Although there is some talk of OpenAI already trying to test the new technique out, it wouldn’t be realistic for them to have entirely changed the world in a matter of months.”
Our reading: It is not realistic that OpenAI's Q* technique has already entirely changed the world within a few months.
No horizon
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“OpenAI could in fact have a breakthrough that fundamentally changes the world.”
Our reading: It is possible that OpenAI has a breakthrough that fundamentally changes the world.
No horizon
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Part of the joke is that I don’t actually think Bing is powered already by the alleged breakthrough.”
Our reading: Marcus does not think Bing is already powered by OpenAI's alleged Q* breakthrough.
No horizon
Qualifier: I don't actually think
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“It’s all still an empirical question; I for one certainly don’t yet know enough about the details of Q* to judge with certainty.”
Our reading: Whether Q* pans out is still an empirical question, and Marcus himself does not yet know enough about the details of Q* to judge it with certainty.
No horizon
Scope: I for one
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“At least so far, Q* ain’t one.”
Our reading: At least so far, OpenAI's Q* is not among the problems Marcus is worried about.
No horizon
Qualifier: at least so far
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Me? I am pretty skeptical; I was only half-kidding when I wrote this:”
Our reading: Marcus is pretty skeptical about OpenAI's reported Q* breakthrough.
No horizon
Qualifier: pretty
Source: About that OpenAI “breakthrough”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“GPT’s “lies” are also legendary, and prolific, but not really lies, because real lies intend to deceive, and GPT has no intent.”
Our reading: GPT produces many falsehoods, but they are not really lies because GPT has no intent to deceive.
No horizon
Source: A Tale of Two Liars
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“This is inconsistent with all narratives about “cloddish” or self-interested boards, and suggests that something real happened.”
Our reading: The reported concessions by Sam Altman and Greg Brockman (giving up board seats, agreeing to an internal investigation) are inconsistent with narratives that the OpenAI board was cloddish or self-interested.
No horizon
Qualifier: given reports that Sam and Greg gave up board seats and Sam agreed to an internal investigation
Source: Massive scoop
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“This is inconsistent with all narratives about “cloddish” or self-interested boards, and suggests that something real happened.”
Our reading: Sam Altman and Greg Brockman giving up their board seats, and Altman agreeing to an internal investigation, are inconsistent with all narratives of a 'cloddish' or self-interested OpenAI board, and suggest that something real happened.
No horizon
Qualifier: based on The Information's report that Sam and Greg gave up their board seats and Sam agreed to an internal investigation
Source: Massive scoop
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The most important thing for humanity is that OpenAI sticks to its original mission:”
Our reading: The most important thing for humanity is that OpenAI sticks to its original mission.
No horizon
Source: OpenAI is back in business
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“We may never fully know what happened.”
Our reading: The public may never fully learn what happened in the November 2023 OpenAI board crisis.
No horizon
Source: OpenAI is back in business
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Bummed to see no women at all. Hopefully the board will expand in due course.”
Our reading: Marcus is disappointed that OpenAI's new board has no women and hopes the board will expand in due course.
No horizon
Qualifier: hopefully
Source: OpenAI is back in business
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“I am glad to see OpenAI is back in business, and am glad to the continued presence of @AdamDAngelo and addition of two new parties that I expect to be neutral.”
Our reading: Marcus expects the two new members of OpenAI's reconstituted board to be neutral.
No horizon
Source: OpenAI is back in business
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The fact that the prospectus warned that the whole thing should be viewed “as a donation” doesn’t seem to have much deterred the investors, but it should have.”
Our reading: Investors should have been deterred by OpenAI's prospectus warning that investment be viewed as a donation.
No horizon
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Of course after all the drama, the company that was reportedly about to invest at a reported $86 billion valuation, Thrive Capital, and its own investors, like CalPERS (the California pension system which is believed to have financed Thrive in part) probably now won’t.”
Our reading: Thrive Capital probably will not now invest in OpenAI at an $86B valuation.
No horizon
Qualifier: after the board drama
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“They never really seemed ready to pursue that, but again, there was always a looming reality that they weren’t facing.”
Our reading: OpenAI never seemed ready to move beyond LLMs.
No horizon
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Rhetoric
“They may have just dodged a bullet.”
Our reading: Thrive Capital and its investors, such as CalPERS, who probably now won't invest at the reported $86 billion valuation, may have just dodged a bullet.
No horizon
Only if: probably now won't invest
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“They may yet get past it, but the tension at the middle would likely remain, always weakening the value of the company as a pure business play.”
Our reading: Even if OpenAI gets past the board drama, the profit-vs-safety tension will likely remain and weaken its value as a business.
No horizon
Qualifier: even if they get past the drama
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“OpenAI might find that new paradigm some day, but someone else (e.g., DeepMind or Anthropic) might well get there first.”
Our reading: Someone other than OpenAI, such as DeepMind or Anthropic, might well find the new paradigm beyond current LLMs before OpenAI does.
No horizon
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“That income is mostly ‘proof of concept” testing, but that income could dry up.”
Our reading: OpenAI's income this year is mostly from proof-of-concept testing, and that income could dry up.
No horizon
Qualifier: mostly
Source: Top 5 reasons why OpenAI was probably never really worth $86 billion
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The $86B secondary sale to Thrive is presumably unlikely to close.”
Our reading: The secondary share sale of OpenAI to Thrive at an $86B valuation is presumably unlikely to close.
No horizon
Source: Everybody’s out
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Probably a lot of employees will leave.”
Our reading: A lot of OpenAI employees will probably leave following the breakdown of negotiations to reinstate Sam Altman.
No horizon
Qualifier: following Sam Altman's ouster and breakdown of negotiations
Source: Everybody’s out
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The schisms on display there highlight the fact that we cannot rely purely on the companies to self-regulate AI, wherein even their own internal governance can be deeply conflicted.”
Our reading: We cannot rely purely on AI companies to self-regulate AI, as the schisms at OpenAI highlight that even their own internal governance can be deeply conflicted.
No horizon
Scope: purely (exclusive reliance on self-regulation)
Source: Open letter to all EU leaders
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The recent events at OpenAI are likely going to lead to considerable, unpredictable instability.”
Our reading: The November 2023 events at OpenAI are likely to lead to considerable, unpredictable instability.
No horizon
Qualifier: following the recent events at OpenAI (November 2023 leadership crisis)
Source: Open letter to all EU leaders
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Please don't gut the EU AI Act; we need it now more than ever.”
Our reading: EU leaders should not gut (drastically weaken) the EU AI Act, because it is needed now more than ever.
No horizon
Qualifier: we need it now more than ever
Source: Open letter to all EU leaders
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Please don't gut the EU AI Act; we need it now more than ever.”
Our reading: The EU AI Act is needed now more than ever, given the turmoil at OpenAI.
No horizon
Qualifier: in light of the OpenAI turmoil
Source: Open letter to all EU leaders
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“I believe that OpenAI is the beginning of a reckoning in Silicon Valley, where the venture community is forced to consider that the only thing that grows forever is cancer.”
Our reading: The OpenAI episode marks the beginning of a reckoning that forces Silicon Valley venture capital to face the limits of growth-at-all-costs.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“It isn’t unthinkable that Microsoft could cut its losses and walk away.”
Our reading: Microsoft could cut its losses on OpenAI and walk away.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Conditional forecast
“In this scenario, it would have acquired everything besides the IP — which, presumably, it could buy at a later date, with its opponent in the negotiations both vastly-diminished and desperate.”
Our reading: If a mass walk-out of OpenAI staff to Microsoft occurs, Microsoft would have acquired everything besides OpenAI's IP, which it presumably could buy later from a vastly diminished and desperate OpenAI.
No horizon
Only if: assuming a mass walk-out occurs
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“The aftermath of this situation will be messy, likely involving lawsuits, investor and employee revolts, and an internal fracturing within OpenAI.”
Our reading: The aftermath of Altman's firing will be messy and will likely include lawsuits, investor and employee revolts, and internal fracturing at OpenAI.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“Shear’s tenure could be just as short-lived as Murati’s.”
Our reading: Emmett Shear's tenure as OpenAI CEO could be as short-lived as Mira Murati's.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“On the balance of probabilities, the odds of a major employee exodus seems high, if not inevitable.”
Our reading: A major employee exodus from OpenAI is highly likely, perhaps inevitable.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“In the end, OpenAI may end up being the most important company in Silicon Valley history, not just for the technology it builds, but for the controversies it’s going to create — and, evidently, has already spawned.”
Our reading: OpenAI may become the most important company in Silicon Valley history, for its technology and for the controversies it creates.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Forecast
“The latter scenario feels especially plausible.”
Our reading: It feels especially plausible that Microsoft, now that Altman and Brockman lead its advanced AI division, will treat OpenAI as a competitor rather than a partner.
No horizon
Qualifier: with Altman and Brockman now leading a Microsoft advanced AI division
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“OpenAI is allegedly on track to generate $1 billion a year in revenue in the next year, but if it’s not profitable at this scale, it’s likely that Altman’s mission has been to make the company more money rather than develop an AGI or, perish the thought, make a sustainable company that doesn’t have to continually live on venture-backed welfare.”
Our reading: If OpenAI, which is allegedly on track to generate $1 billion a year in revenue in the next year, is not profitable at that scale, it is likely that Altman's mission has been to make the company more money rather than develop an AGI or build a sustainable company that does not have to keep living on venture funding.
No horizon
Only if: if OpenAI is not profitable at this scale
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Conditional forecast
“While AI making goofy factual errors can be good for a laugh, but when poorly-tested (or error-prone) artificial intelligence enters critical infrastructure like healthcare, the results could be deadly.”
Our reading: Poorly tested or error-prone AI deployed in critical infrastructure such as healthcare could have deadly results.
No horizon
Only if: when poorly-tested or error-prone AI enters critical infrastructure like healthcare
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Rhetoric
“And this entire fiasco has shown that the tech industry is entirely beholden to the largest and richest men in technology, and no amount of theoretical altruism or positive motives can outdo those who control the money and the cloud infrastructure of the tech industry.”
Our reading: The OpenAI fiasco has shown that the tech industry is entirely beholden to the largest and richest men in technology, and that no amount of theoretical altruism or positive motives can outdo those who control the industry's money and cloud infrastructure.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Conditional forecast
“In the event that the “AI safety” story is true, this is likely a watershed moment in the tech industry.”
Our reading: If Altman was fired over AI safety concerns, the firing is likely a watershed moment for the tech industry.
No horizon
Only if: if the AI safety explanation for the firing is true
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“Even though fears about an Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) may be hyperbolic (or, rather, somewhat premature), there is a real problem in rushing artificial intelligence into the functionality of the world as the technology currently stands.”
Our reading: Although fears about AGI may be hyperbolic or somewhat premature, there is a real problem in rushing AI into the functioning of the world as the technology currently stands.
No horizon
Qualifier: as the technology currently stands
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Observation
“While we will find out exactly what happens next in the following days or weeks, it’s likely that Altman wanted OpenAI to go in a different direction to the board — one that allowed it to continue to scale in an unsustainable way, or that would work against the non-profit’s mission.”
Our reading: Altman likely wanted OpenAI to go in a different direction from the board, one that allowed it to keep scaling unsustainably or that would work against the non-profit's mission.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Ed Zitron Recommendation or value judgment
“People shouldn’t be afraid of an AGI — they should fear what happens when greedy executives look to automate away as much as possible.”
Our reading: People should fear greedy executives automating as much as possible, not AGI.
No horizon
Source: Sam Altman, Freed
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“They may well get their way.”
Our reading: OpenAI's investors may well succeed in getting the board to resign and bringing Sam Altman back.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If Sam doesn’t come back, Mira may rightfully be perturbed, and if the rumor is correct they’ve now undermined her.”
Our reading: If Altman does not return, Mira Murati may rightly be perturbed, and if the rumor is true, the board has undermined her.
No horizon
Only if: if Sam Altman doesn't come back
Source: Firing Sam and then trying to bring him back is a hot mess.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“From the outside, it’s extremely hard to see how all that adds up to a well-played , well-thought through hand.”
Our reading: From the outside, it is extremely hard to see how the OpenAI board's actions around firing and trying to rehire Sam Altman add up to a well-played, well-thought-through hand.
No horizon
Qualifier: from the outside
Source: Firing Sam and then trying to bring him back is a hot mess.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If Sam does come back, they have accomplished nothing (and probably lost Ilya and the $86B secondary sale) and returned to someone they don’t trust, and given him more power, which may inherently undermine safety.”
Our reading: If Altman returns, the board will have accomplished nothing, probably lost Ilya Sutskever and the $86B secondary sale, and given more power to someone it doesn't trust.
No horizon
Only if: if Sam Altman comes back
Source: Firing Sam and then trying to bring him back is a hot mess.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If Sam does come back, they have accomplished nothing (and probably lost Ilya and the $86B secondary sale) and returned to someone they don’t trust, and given him more power, which may inherently undermine safety.”
Our reading: If Sam Altman comes back, the board will have given him more power, which may inherently undermine safety.
No horizon
Only if: if Sam does come back
Source: Firing Sam and then trying to bring him back is a hot mess.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“The tail thus appears to have wagged the dog—potentially imperiling the original mission, if there was any substance at all to the Board’s concerns.”
Our reading: The for-profit side of OpenAI appears to have overridden the nonprofit board, potentially putting the original mission at risk if there was any substance at all to the Board's concerns.
No horizon
Qualifier: appears to have
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“If Altman returns and the board resigns as now seems likely”
Our reading: It seems likely that Sam Altman will return to OpenAI and the board will resign.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“How things play out might or might have major impact on the prospects of generative AI.”
Our reading: How the OpenAI leadership turmoil plays out might or might not have a major impact on the prospects of generative AI.
No horizon
Qualifier: "might or might have" read as an apparent typo for "might or might not", hedging both ways
Source: The biggest immediate lesson from the OpenAI meltdown
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The fact that the governance of one of the most visible AI companies in the world can change literally overnight should be a reminder that we can’t make our judgements about a company’s trustworthiness based simply on a vibe about their CEO.”
Our reading: The fact that the governance of one of the most visible AI companies in the world can change literally overnight should remind us that we can't judge a company's trustworthiness based simply on a vibe about its CEO.
No horizon
Qualifier: the governance of one of the most visible AI companies in the world can change literally overnight
Source: The biggest immediate lesson from the OpenAI meltdown
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“(In my view, without some sort of documentation, they wouldn’t have pulled the trigger).”
Our reading: In Marcus's view, the OpenAI board would not have fired Altman without some sort of documentation.
No horizon
Only if: without some sort of documentation
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The second is that nobody does something that dramatic without some kind of serious motivation; already it looks like the planned $86B valuation might not go through, per The Information.”
Our reading: According to The Information's reporting, it already looks like OpenAI's planned $86B valuation might not go through.
No horizon
Qualifier: per The Information
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“A lot of shareholders could be pissed; unless there was a smoking gun, the litigation could be endless.”
Our reading: A lot of shareholders could be angry, and unless there was a smoking gun, the litigation could be endless.
No horizon
Only if: unless there was a smoking gun
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“At some point the board came to believe this new company would undermine the nonprofit’s mission, and also discovered, perhaps e.g., from an email that someone got hold of, that he was not candid with them about important details—in ways that shattered trust.”
Our reading: Marcus guesses that the OpenAI board fired Altman because it believed his planned new venture would undermine the nonprofit's mission and found he had not been candid about important details, shattering trust.
No horizon
Qualifier: offered as a guess / theory of the case
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“The hubris of Spring of 2022 has to some small but detectable extent diminishing.”
Our reading: As of November 2023, the hubris of spring 2022 has diminished to some small but detectable extent.
No horizon
Qualifier: to some small but detectable extent
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The sooner we stop climbing the hill we are on, and start looking for new paradigms, the better.”
Our reading: AI research should stop pursuing the current LLM/scaling approach as soon as possible and look for new paradigms.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“GPT-4 (introduced in the intervening period) is surely better, but people have little by little started to recognize that scoring better on benchmarks is NOT the same as making foundational progress.”
Our reading: GPT-4 is surely better than the models of spring 2022, but people have little by little started to recognize that scoring better on benchmarks is not the same as making foundational progress.
No horizon
Qualifier: surely
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“Breaking news: the draft EU AI Act—the closest thing we have to AI regulation with real teeth—is in serious jeopardy, potentially a direct victim of regulatory capture, governments doing the bidding of those they are supposed govern.”
Our reading: The jeopardy facing the draft EU AI Act may be a direct result of regulatory capture, with governments doing the bidding of tech companies.
No horizon
Qualifier: potentially
Source: Crisis point in AI?
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Possible future: Literally every bad thing that comes out of generative AI-and there will may well be a lot—people will wonder: “maybe this wouldn’t have happened had Macron and Scholz not blocked the planet’s best effort at keeping the tech companies in check.””
Our reading: In a possible future, for literally every bad thing that comes out of generative AI (and there may well be a lot), people will wonder whether it might not have happened had Macron and Scholz not blocked the EU AI Act, which he calls the planet's best effort at keeping the tech companies in check.
No horizon
Qualifier: framed as a possible future
Source: Crisis point in AI?
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If true self-driving is this hard, despite the amount of data that has been collected and amount of money invested ($100B+), any dreams of AGI happening soon are likely wildly unrealistic.”
Our reading: If true self-driving is this hard despite the data collected and $100B+ invested, any dreams of AGI happening soon are likely wildly unrealistic.
No horizon
Only if: if true self-driving is this hard, despite the data collected and $100B+ invested
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The whole self-driving cars industry is this likely to be viewed in a few years as an epic fail, crushed by outliers and AI that could not reason adequately.”
Our reading: Within a few years the self-driving car industry will likely be seen as an epic failure, defeated by outliers and AI's inadequate reasoning.
No horizon
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Driver-assist (a la Tesla) with humans in the loop may well stay, occasionally causing fatal accidents, given its lack of reliability”
Our reading: Driver-assist systems like Tesla's may persist while occasionally causing fatal accidents due to unreliability.
No horizon
Qualifier: humans in the loop
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“We may see similar disappointments in safety-critical applications of LLMs (eg medicine), years of promise, but humans still for a very long time required in the loop, true autonomy difficult to achieve.”
Our reading: LLMs in safety-critical domains like medicine may disappoint, requiring humans in the loop for a very long time.
No horizon
Qualifier: safety-critical applications such as medicine
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“This is not true autonomy, but semi-autonomy. It might (I doubt it) save money, but it has literally nothing to do with AGI.”
Our reading: Remotely-assisted driving is semi-autonomy, not true autonomy; it might save money, though the author doubts it; and it has literally nothing to do with AGI.
No horizon
Qualifier: might save money (I doubt it)
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Quite possible nobody will turn a profit in remote driving anytime soon; quite possibly everybody is spending quite heavily on remote assist centers, in hopes of achieving true autonomy.”
Our reading: It is quite possible no company will profit from remote-assisted driving anytime soon.
No horizon
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Rhetoric
“No fantasy about AGI thus far has survived contact with the real world.”
Our reading: No AGI fantasy so far has held up against the real world.
No horizon
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“Waymo is probably better, but how much better is anybody’s guess.”
Our reading: Waymo is probably better, but how much better is anybody's guess.
No horizon
Qualifier: probably
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“Remote driving itself is unlikely to work well enough as an endgame on public roads, because data communications just aren’t stable enough.”
Our reading: Remote driving is unlikely to work well enough as a long-term solution on public roads because data communications are not stable enough.
No horizon
Qualifier: on public roads
Source: Rethinking “driverless cars”
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“But it’s starting to feel like if the cars were actually left to their own devices, all hell would break loose.”
Our reading: It increasingly appears that Cruise cars would perform disastrously if left to operate without remote human help.
No horizon
Only if: if left without remote operators
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“Shareholders will certainly sue, and if it’s bad as it looks, I doubt that GM will continue the project, which was recently suspended.”
Our reading: If the situation is as bad as it looks, GM probably will not continue the Cruise driverless project.
No horizon
Only if: if it's as bad as it looks
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The State of California should demand answers immediately, and share them with the public.”
Our reading: California should immediately demand that driverless car companies disclose their remote operator use and make the answers public.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“We really ought be a bit more patient about comparing risks and benefits.”
Our reading: We ought to be a bit more patient about comparing the risks and benefits of open source AI.
No horizon
Qualifier: a bit more patient
Source: Where we are right now on open source and potential AI risk.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Observation
“There is a nonzero chance that they have put us all at massive risk, with zero oversight.”
Our reading: There is a nonzero chance that the company's open source AI push has put everyone at massive risk without oversight.
No horizon
Qualifier: nonzero chance
Source: Where we are right now on open source and potential AI risk.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The fact that a single company can unilaterally make this decision for all of humanity is terrifying.”
Our reading: It is terrifying that a single company can unilaterally make the open source AI decision for all of humanity.
No horizon
Scope: a single company
Source: Where we are right now on open source and potential AI risk.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“What we really need is a peer-review process by independent scientists; it still seems like the companies are free to do largely as we please. That’s not enough.”
Our reading: What is really needed is a peer-review process by independent scientists, because it still seems the order leaves companies free to do largely as they please, and that is not enough.
No horizon
Qualifier: it still seems companies are largely free
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“The US Executive Order is an important first step in that direction”
Our reading: The US Executive Order is an important first step toward concrete implementation of AI policy.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“There’s a lot to like in the Executive Order. It’s fantastic that the US government is taking the many risks of AI seriously.”
Our reading: There is a lot to like in the White House AI Executive Order, and it is fantastic that the US government is taking the many risks of AI seriously.
No horizon
Qualifier: first impressions based on the fact sheet, before seeing the final order
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The Executive Order, as good as it is, may fall short.”
Our reading: The AI Executive Order may fall short despite its merits.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“Not all AI uses foundational models at all (e.g., until recently probably few driverless car systems relied in a significant way on foundational models, and some probably still don’t), and it’s easy to add some other gadgets in and say your model is not a foundational model. Framing things as only pertaining to foundational models is plainly too narrow.”
Our reading: Framing the order's requirements as applying only to foundation models is plainly too narrow, because not all AI uses foundation models and it is easy to add other components and say a model is not a foundation model.
No horizon
Qualifier: e.g., until recently probably few driverless car systems relied significantly on foundation models, and some probably still don't
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“We don’t need another position paper; we need concrete implementation.”
Our reading: AI governance needs concrete implementation rather than more position papers.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Recommendation or value judgment
“On the whole, there is lot of good stuff around guidance, but I hope that we ultimately see more that is binding, with teeth.”
Our reading: US AI policy should ultimately include more binding rules with enforcement teeth beyond guidance.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“With respect to the example above, they will probably try to argue that their specific products don’t meet the risk threshold.”
Our reading: AI companies will probably argue their products don't meet the order's serious-risk threshold.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“The sooner we recognize that there is life beyond current approaches to AI, the faster we will get there.”
Our reading: The sooner the field recognizes that there are options beyond current AI approaches, the faster it will reach reliable self-driving, search and agents.
No horizon
Source: Why driverless cars might—or might not—be at the end of the road
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Causal claim
“The same by the way probably holds for generative search and personalized agents.”
Our reading: Generative search and personalized agents probably also need much smarter, reasoning, non-hallucinating AI that comes from fundamental research.
No horizon
Source: Why driverless cars might—or might not—be at the end of the road
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Forecast
“The Cruise announcement is likely to have a major impact, too.”
Our reading: GM's suspension of Cruise is likely to have a major impact on the self-driving industry.
No horizon
Source: Why driverless cars might—or might not—be at the end of the road
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If that’s true, what works in a certain road in San Francisco might not generalize all that well to other places; every new jurisdiction (and every individual road within a jurisdiction) might need a lot of expensive work.”
Our reading: If Waymo depends on heavy road-specific customization, its approach might not generalize well beyond places like San Francisco, and each new jurisdiction or road might need a lot of expensive work.
No horizon
Only if: if the rumor that Waymo relies on heavy road-specific customization is true
Source: Why driverless cars might—or might not—be at the end of the road
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Gary Marcus Conditional forecast
“If Alphabet pulls the plug on Waymo, it may be the end of driverless cars for now–but not forever.”
Our reading: If Alphabet shuts down Waymo, driverless cars may be finished for now, but not permanently.
No horizon
Only if: if Alphabet pulls the plug on Waymo
Source: Why driverless cars might—or might not—be at the end of the road