In reply to:
Nils Gilman
@nils_gilman
·
518d
The statement and the linked article engage in a substantive discussion about the timeline and feasibility of achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). The conversation involves critical analysis and references to historical psychological studies, contributing to the public discourse on AI development and expectations.
- The statement does no harm and is part of a constructive dialogue about AGI timelines. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by referencing an article that provides further evidence and analysis on the topic. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism and dialogue, referencing historical context to support the argument. [+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 the platform to contribute to a broader discussion on AI, which is a significant societal issue. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.