Gary Marcus has made himself the most prominent proponent of "deep learning is a parlor trick and cannot create real AI" (note: deep learning, not just LLMs), which he has been saying almost unmodified from before LLMs even existed to now.

Though I think he might have stopped setting specific concrete goalposts to move, sometime between when I last checked in on him and now. After (often almost instantly) losing a couple dozen consecutive rounds of "LLMs/deep learning fundamentally cannot/will never", while never acknowledging any of it.

What does it mean when someone is sticking to their guns? Is it a bad thing? I do appreciate consistency, albeit a fair consistency and Gary Marcus's points do stand. When these criticisms are addressed (if it's possible to) you'd probably hear less from Gary Marcus.

Show me the goalposts I have moved, with actual quotes to prove it. nobody ever has when I have asked.

Aso consider eg the bets I have made with Miles Brundage (and offered to Musk(, with money where I have backed up my views.

good summary of predictions i made - mostly correct – is here: https://open.substack.com/pub/garymarcus/p/25-ai-predictions...

There's also a perspective that all of the ongoing problems have been the same while newer techniques shove them under different rugs. So I can see how that would look like that to the credulous.