In reply to:
Jeremy Kahn
@jeremyakahn
·
540d
The statement is part of a conversation about the regulation of technology and the character of the people involved in its development, which is a substantive engagement with public issues. The tone is critical but constructive, aiming to contribute to the dialogue on how to approach technology regulation. The intent is to argue for a cautious approach to regulation that assumes potential negative outcomes, while also emphasizing the importance of scrutinizing the character of influential figures in the field, whether elected or not. The content addresses the debate on the criteria for regulating technology, suggesting a balance between assessing the technology itself and the individuals behind it.
- The statement does not appear to do harm with words or actions. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others, without engaging in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding by suggesting a balanced approach to regulation. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism without personal attacks. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement uses influence to contribute to a societal debate on technology regulation. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech responsibly. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.