In reply to:
Tїm S
@tim333
·
412d
The statement by @GaryMarcus constitutes public discourse as it engages with a substantive public issue, namely the future and impact of OpenAI and its backing by Microsoft. The tone is analytical and aims to clarify a previous statement about the potential crash of AI companies, specifically OpenAI.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It is a clarification of a previous analytical point. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others. It does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying a previous point about the potential crash of AI companies. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by addressing confusion and providing additional context. It 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 to discuss a public issue. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.