Gary Marcus

The statement and the preceding conversation constitute public discourse as they engage in a substantive debate about the future of AI, specifically the potential and limitations of large language models (LLMs). The tone of the statement is somewhat lighthearted but also critical, as it questions the actions of a public figure in the AI community. The intent appears to be to highlight a perceived overreaction to a disagreement about the future of AI development in Austin.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but it does mock the action of blocking someone over a disagreement, which could be seen as a minor violation of promoting a respectful dialogue. [-1]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   The statement respects privacy and dignity to some extent but does engage in a form of public shaming by highlighting the blocking action, which could be seen as a minor violation. [-1]
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, it focuses on a personal action (blocking) rather than the substantive issue at hand, which is a minor violation. [-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 statement engages in a form of personal attack by mocking the action of blocking, rather than focusing on constructive criticism of the ideas presented, which is a minor violation. [-1]