In reply to:
one-one-two
@manicprone
·
148d
The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the progress and potential limitations of large language models (LLMs), which is a relevant public issue in the field of artificial intelligence. The tone is analytical and aims to provide a counterpoint to the optimistic view expressed by Lex Fridman. The intent is to argue that recent advancements in LLMs may not be as significant as they appear and that we might be experiencing diminishing returns.
- The statement does not cause harm and is focused on a technical debate, thus adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by providing evidence and reasoning to support its viewpoint, contributing to a more nuanced discussion. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism without resorting to personal attacks, adhering to the principle of respectful dialogue. [+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.