Safety
Every time I tell AI utopianists that biology is too complex for AI to 'solve', they cite the success of AlphaFold. No, AlphaFold did not 's…
Every time I tell AI utopianists that biology is too complex for AI to 'solve', they cite the success of AlphaFold. No, AlphaFold did not 'solve' protein folding. It gets broad structures correct ~70-
Every time I tell AI utopianists that biology is too complex for AI to "solve", they cite the success of AlphaFold. No, AlphaFold did not "solve" protein folding. It gets broad structures correct ~70-88% of the time (depending on evaluation), enabling useful but flawed statistical guesses. True "solving" would require ~99.9%+ accuracy, practically zero meaningful edge cases, and high confidence across fine details like side chains and conformations. Even then, this is just one narrow slice of the complexities of proteomics. The persistent gap between the "AlphaFold solved protein folding" claim and reality is a perfect example of AI overhype in biology.
Related
- I rest my case: Mythos isn’t AGI. It’s not even better at biology than the last model. It’s tuned to particular things, not a giant advance …
- good to know that a trillion dollars’ investment scaling has thoroughly solved the challenges of common sense.
- @GaryMarcus Essentially your prediction that LLMs to scale wouldn’t solve key fundamental problems, reasoning, factual reliability, composit…
- Seriously. If you don’t understand the below, you really shouldn’t speculate about AI. It’s absolutely fundamental.
Source: Gary Marcus (X) | 2026-04-25