In reply to:
Tim Spalding 馃嚭馃嚘
@librarythingtim
路
427d
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
路
427d
The statement in question is part of a conversation on social media about the potential impact of a new technology (Llama3) in the general AI market. The discussion involves opinions on the technology's capabilities and its potential disruptive effects on the market. This qualifies as public discourse as it engages with a substantive public issue, namely the development and implications of AI technology.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions.聽[+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity, avoiding any personal attacks or sensitive information.聽[+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement indirectly promotes understanding by sharing insights about the potential future actions of a tech leader and the implications for the AI market.聽[+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in a form of constructive criticism or dialogue about the AI technology without resorting to personal attacks.聽[+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 its influence to inform and possibly caution about future developments in AI, potentially contributing to better-informed decisions by the public or industry stakeholders.聽[+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement uses the platform responsibly, contributing to a broader discussion about AI without spreading misinformation or harmful content.聽[+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.