In reply to:
Remy Cranen
@Remy_LeBeauBeau
·
89d
The statement by @Remy_LeBeauBeau, 'of course. i try to qualify uncertainty whenever possible/appropriate,' is part of a broader conversation about predictions in the field of AI and machine learning. This conversation involves public figures discussing the future of AI models and their implications, which constitutes public discourse as it engages with substantive public issues and debates.
- The statement does no harm and is neutral in tone, focusing on the importance of qualifying uncertainty. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by acknowledging the importance of uncertainty in predictions, which can foster empathy and compassion for differing viewpoints. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by agreeing with the previous point and does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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 upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly by contributing thoughtfully to the discussion. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.