Gary Marcus

The statement in question is a part of a Twitter conversation that leads to a link to an essay discussing the implications of Meta's new model and stock market trends. The essay's title 'Groupthink versus Tulips. What will historians think of 2024?' suggests an analysis of current technological and economic events and their potential historical significance. This qualifies as public discourse as it engages with substantive public issues, specifically the impact of technology on society and economic trends.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement aims to inform and provoke thought without causing harm, aligning with the principle of doing no harm with words. [+1]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   The statement respects privacy and dignity, avoiding any form of harassment or hate speech. [+1]
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   By sharing insights on significant topics, the statement promotes understanding and potentially empathy regarding the impacts of technological and economic developments. [+1]
4. 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, through its analytical nature, encourages constructive dialogue about important issues rather than engaging in personal attacks. [+1]
5. Principle 6:

   I will use my influence for the betterment of society.

   The statement uses the platform to contribute to societal understanding of significant trends, thus using influence for societal betterment. [+1]
6. Principle 7:

   I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.

   The statement upholds principles of free speech responsibly, sharing informed opinions on public platforms. [+1]