Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47

Score 83

Reposted by Gary Marcus

I did some digging about the topic. When you see articles/presentations promoting generative AI and the rights of AI companies, check the author. More often than not, you will find out they're a lawyer hired by AI companies to lobby for them. Here is a thread with examples:

Jon Lam #CreateDontScrape

@JonLamArt

623d

I'm noticing an uptick in headlines along the lines of "It's time we accept Ai" or that "Ai is better than all creativity" or "Tired of being falsely accused of using Ai?"

These Tech people have deep pockets and are definitely paying off publishers. Extremely sus timing

5/21/2024, 6:20:35 PM

The statement and accompanying image aim to raise awareness about potential biases in articles and presentations promoting generative AI, suggesting that many of these pieces are authored by lawyers hired by AI companies. The tone is investigative and cautionary, encouraging readers to scrutinize the sources of such information. The conversation it refers to also implies skepticism about the motivations behind pro-AI headlines, suggesting financial influence from tech companies.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement strives to do no harm by encouraging critical thinking and awareness about potential biases in AI-related content. It does not engage in personal attacks or harmful rhetoric. [+1]
Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the professional roles of the individuals mentioned rather than making personal attacks. However, it does imply a level of distrust towards these professionals, which could be seen as a mild violation of this principle. [-1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement promotes understanding and empathy by encouraging readers to consider the potential biases in AI-related content. It aims to foster a more informed and critical audience. [+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 engages in constructive criticism by questioning the motivations behind certain pro-AI articles and presentations. It does not engage in personal attacks but rather focuses on the broader issue of potential bias and lobbying. [+1]
Principle 6:
I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
The statement uses its platform to raise awareness about a potential issue in the public discourse around AI, aiming to contribute to a more informed and critical society. [+1]