We need a name for the kind of people that conflate 2022 pure LLMs that were in fact a tiny bit like stochastic parrots (not my phrase, and …

We need a name for the kind of people that conflate 2022 pure LLMs that were in fact a tiny bit like stochastic parrots (not my phrase, and not one I ever endorsed) with 2026 systems that couple those LLMs together with symbolic harnesses, code interpreters, and symbolic verification, typically to make a slippery rhetorical point. Aside from being unfair to people who made a metaphor that applied (to some degree) to the technology of that time, it disrespects the innovations that were subsequently made and disrespects the critical contributions that neurosymbolic AI made to progress. What I hate most about this site is that so many people talk about AI yet few take any time to understand how the different underlying technologies work. Most prefer to make cheap rhetorical points instead. Which is exactly why we are in the mess we are in. Emad Mostaque (founder of Stability AI) on Navier-Stokes proof by AI. "Do you really think there's anything you can do cognitively that this AI can't do? 88 hours with 10,000 AI agents solved it, thats 100 years of top level mathematician work. Think about that. Before this week,…

Source: Gary Marcus (X) | 2026-10-12