In reply to:
Pete Spicer
@Arantor
·
537d
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
537d
The statement 'Don’t use windows - can you explain what one would have to do, whether an average user could do so etc? Not having that protection by default seems foolish.' is part of a public discourse on the security vulnerabilities of Microsoft's AI Recall feature. The tone is critical and seeks clarification on the feasibility of avoiding Windows due to security concerns.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but implies that using Windows without certain protections is foolish, which could be seen as a strong critique. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity by focusing on the security issue rather than attacking individuals. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding by asking for an explanation on how an average user could avoid using Windows, which could lead to a more informed public. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by seeking clarification and not resorting to personal attacks. [+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.