In reply to:
Sami Taha
@tahainnovate
·
627d
The statement by @GaryMarcus constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive debate about originality and plagiarism in the field of AI research. The tone is accusatory and confrontational, and the intent is to call out perceived plagiarism by Yann LeCun. The content includes a claim of plagiarism, a link to evidence, and a call for an apology.
- The statement potentially causes harm by publicly accusing someone of plagiarism without presenting all the evidence upfront. This could damage reputations and professional relationships. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not respect the privacy and dignity of Yann LeCun, as it publicly accuses him of a serious ethical violation. [-2]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, it escalates the conflict. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. It makes a serious accusation without inviting a constructive discussion. [-2]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 does not acknowledge any mistakes or show a willingness to correct them.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement uses the platform to address a significant issue in AI research, which could be seen as an attempt to better the field by calling out unethical behavior. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.