In reply to:
Aʟᴇᴋꜱᴀɴᴅʀᴀ ᴘʀᴢᴇɢᴀʟɪɴꜱᴋᴀ
@Przegaa
·
537d
Tomek Czajka
@TCzajka
·
537d
Aʟᴇᴋꜱᴀɴᴅʀᴀ ᴘʀᴢᴇɢᴀʟɪɴꜱᴋᴀ
@Przegaa
·
541d
The statement engages in a discussion about the current state and future of AI technology, particularly in the context of its market performance and user satisfaction. The tone is analytical and somewhat critical, suggesting that many people have been disappointed by the results of GenAI, which could lead to decreased usage. This contributes to the broader conversation about the sustainability and impact of AI technology, making it a part of public discourse.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm; it is a critical observation based on perceived user experiences.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by sharing an observation about user satisfaction with GenAI, which can contribute to a more informed discussion about the technology's future. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism without resorting to 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.