In reply to:
Ernesto G.M.
@EGMontesano
·
526d
The statement by @GaryMarcus constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about the comparison of OpenAI with other companies like WeWork and Theranos, which are significant public issues. The tone of the statement is defensive and somewhat confrontational, aiming to address a perceived premature judgment by @EGMontesano and @tunguz.
- The statement does not strive to do no harm with words and actions. Calling someone's comment 'pretty dumb' is dismissive and can be considered harmful. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not respect the dignity of others. The use of 'pretty dumb' can be seen as a form of verbal disrespect, though it does not rise to the level of cyberbullying 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 does not engage in constructive criticism and dialogue. Instead of addressing the content of the disagreement, it resorts to a personal attack by calling the comment 'pretty dumb.' [-2]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.