A company dedicated to creating autonomous, socially-interactive robot companions to empower the growing number of people needing assistance with daily living.
@elonmusk Shame on your Elon for re-posting this. I'm sure you consider this free speech, but it offers no value to the real issues in this election. Please stop.
@aurimas_knepa@tsarnick Yep. HB promised us Rosey in 1962. Then Bushnell after he sold off Atari, but so far the only success has been Roomba. That said, simpler forms (but not humanoid) may get here soon.
@tsarnick Too bad he doesn't give a timeframe. Consider that an NVidia Jetson module alone is ~$1600, and you need batteries, motors, sensors, etc. Unlike cars, which are driven by a human brain, it will need a lot more software to do all those tasks we want. How much is a Telsa Model X?
@GaryMarcus This is why it is a folly to assume these companies can be “self-regulating”. If OpenAI, Microsoft, etc. could be trusted they would already be transparent about the data they used.
@StefanFSchubert@GaryMarcus@anilkseth My take is that tech/tools (e.g. phone, calculator, etc.) doesn't have to be conscious to be useful. Further as we don't fully understand how conscious works, it is somewhat a folly to assume we can or should.
@aidan_mclau@GaryMarcus@anilkseth Gary can probably speak for himself on this, but snake oil can be considered dangerous to ingest even if it is not effective.
@bobehayes@GaryMarcus Perhaps a starting point would be to stop calling this stuff artificial “intelligence” and use a more appropriate term like “Statistical Heuristic Inference Technology “😆
Current examples of AI demonstrate some amazing results but it is important to understand that it isn’t without risks, (that are much more pragmatic than the imminent destruction of humanity). This post provides a balanced perspective on the issues. https://t.co/Bu0vYQYHJ8
@etzioni But where is the commitment to transparency regarding what data they are using for training or commitment to compensate those whose data they use or commitment to enable people or entities to opt out of their data being used?
@VinceMtenga @GaryMarcus If you are implying that Gary Marcus is a Luddite, you don’t know Gary, or understand his concerns. But maybe you are one of those rogue AIs he warns about that often get the facts wrong.
Stephen and Chey Cobb: Independent Researchers: What is ChatGPT and how can AI get things wrong: an annotated example using jackware https://t.co/JwF26MDcZ3
@cosmojg@ylecun@emerywells I think you misunderstand how GPT works, in that it’s responses are derived from the collection of information it was trained on. So if there is no history in its training of human developing that, it isn’t going to generate that.
@MelMitchell1@katecrawford Public statements from most of the suppliers of these technologies suggest that they agree, but there seems to be NO ACTION that they are taking to proactively move in that direction.
@GaryMarcus Major creators of LLM technologies (e.g. OpenAI, Microsoft, etc.) have publically acknowledged that 1) there are potential dangers now, 2) that there should be regulations around use, and 3) that there should be more transparency. So where is their commitment to these objectives?