Gary Marcus

Rank 15 of 47
|
Score 76

The statement by @CbsaSciencehub and the reply to it both engage in a discussion about the future of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), which is a significant public issue. The original statement by @CbsaSciencehub includes a personal attack on @GaryMarcus, which is problematic. The reply attempts to refute the claim about AGI by 2027 and suggests preparation, but it does not address the personal attack.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The original statement by @CbsaSciencehub violates the principle of doing no harm with words by making a derogatory comment about @GaryMarcus. The reply does not address this harm but focuses on the AGI prediction. [-2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The original statement violates the principle of respecting the privacy and dignity of others by engaging in a personal attack. The reply does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech but does not condemn the original attack either. [-2]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The reply promotes understanding and preparation for AGI, which aligns with the principle of promoting understanding, empathy, and compassion. However, it does not address the lack of empathy in the original statement. [+1]
  4. 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 original statement violates the principle of engaging in constructive criticism and dialogue by making a personal attack. The reply focuses on the AGI prediction and does not engage in personal attacks, but it does not promote constructive dialogue either. [-1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The original statement does not uphold the principles of free speech responsibly and with integrity due to the personal attack. The reply uses the platform to discuss AGI responsibly but does not address the integrity issue in the original statement.