The statement is a critical reflection on the potential future consequences of the current use of large language models (LLMs). It suggests that the quality of outputs from these models could deteriorate over time due to the ingestion of low-quality data. The tone is somewhat cynical and poses a rhetorical question to provoke thought about the responsibility and foresight in the development and deployment of AI technologies.
- The statement does not directly harm anyone with words but uses a critical tone that could be perceived as harsh by those invested in LLM development.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It indirectly promotes understanding by highlighting a potential issue in AI development, though it could have been more empathetic to those working on these models.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in a form of criticism but does not provide constructive feedback or a dialogue opportunity, focusing instead on a hypothetical scenario. [-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.
- It raises awareness about a potential societal issue related to AI technology, which could be seen as using influence for societal betterment, albeit in a critical manner. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.