In reply to:
Dr Patrick M. - AI Builder
@patmcguinness
·
535d
The statement is engaging in a substantive discussion about the nature of AGI and the evaluation of LLMs, contributing to the broader conversation on AI capabilities and expectations. The tone is critical and aims to highlight the consistency of the argument made by the author over time, suggesting that the criteria for AGI have changed rather than the fundamental capabilities of the systems in question.
- The statement does not cause harm but rather contributes to the debate on AGI. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the dignity of others and does not engage in 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 referencing historical arguments and suggesting a need for consistency in evaluating AGI. [+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 author is willing to engage in dialogue by referencing their own work and inviting comparison to current discussions. [+1]Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement uses the platform responsibly to contribute to the discussion on AI and AGI, maintaining integrity in the debate. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.