The idea that practitioners would try to discredit research to protect the golden goose from critique speaks to human nature.

No one is discrediting research from valid places, this is the victim alt-right style narrative that seems to follow Gary Marcus around. Somehow the mainstream is "suppressing" the real knowledge

experts are often blinded by their paychecks to see how nonsense their expertise is

Not knowing the most basic things about the subject you are critiquing is utter nonsense. Defending someone who does this is even worse

I think it's pretty fair to be critical of what LLMs are producing and how they fit into the tools without necessarily understanding how they work

If you bought a chainsaw that broke when you tried to cut down a tree, then you can criticize the chainsaw without knowing how the motor on it works, right?

Except that he pretends to know how they work, and paints himself as an expert in the ecosystem but knows nothing about how they actually work

[citation needed]

Remember Web 3.0? Lol

It's unfortunate that a discussion about LLM weaknesses is giving crypto bro. But telling. There are a lot of bubble valuations out there.

It's only telling of the people who have a nascent understanding of tech cycles and who are more interested in confirming biases than attempting to respect or understand a subculture, and who are unable to recognize that every hype cycle will attract parasitic undesirables who are not representative of the movement they are hijacking.

Yes, did you have an argument to make?