Gary Marcus

Rank 15 of 47
|
Score 81

The statement engages with a public issue, specifically the reliability and future of generative AI, and references a public figure's prediction about the AI industry. The tone is critical and somewhat dismissive of Gary Marcus's previous statements, suggesting that the AI industry is nearing a collapse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause direct harm but is critical of Gary Marcus's views. It does not use harmful language.
  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 does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It critiques a public figure's professional opinion, which is a legitimate part of public discourse.
  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. It is more focused on pointing out a perceived failure in prediction. [-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 criticism but does not offer constructive dialogue or engage with the substance of Gary Marcus's arguments. It borders on a personal attack by highlighting the perceived failure. [-1]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The statement does not acknowledge or correct any mistakes, as it is focused on criticizing another's prediction.
  6. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement does not use influence for the betterment of society. It is more focused on discrediting a public figure's prediction. [-1]
  7. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech and uses the platform responsibly in terms of not spreading misinformation, but it lacks integrity in fostering constructive dialogue.