Reposted by Gary Marcus
π²ππππππ π². πΌπππ
@CharlesCMann
Β·
268d
The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the achievements and implications of engineering in space exploration, specifically referencing the longevity and repairability of technology used in NASA's Voyager 1 mission. It contrasts these achievements with the perceived shortcomings of generative AI technologies, suggesting a debate on the value and impact of different types of engineering innovations.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm but could be seen as dismissive towards generative AI, potentially undermining the work of engineers in that field.Β [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding and appreciation for the engineering behind space technology, but lacks empathy towards the field of generative AI.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in a form of constructive criticism by highlighting what the author perceives as more impactful engineering work. However, it could be seen as somewhat dismissive towards generative AI, which might not encourage open dialogue.Β [-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 highlight the achievements of space engineering, which could inspire public interest and appreciation for such endeavors.Β [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.