The statement 'Nope. Because we aren’t doing science here. Scaling has become a religion; counter evidence doesn’t count.' constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue related to artificial intelligence (AI) and its development. The tone is dismissive and critical, suggesting that the current approach to AI scaling is dogmatic and not based on scientific evidence.
- The statement does not directly cause harm, but its dismissive tone could be seen as undermining constructive dialogue. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It respects the privacy and dignity of others. [+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 promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is critical without offering constructive alternatives. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not offer constructive dialogue or solutions. It could be seen as dismissive rather than engaging in meaningful debate. [-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 principle of free speech but does not use the platform responsibly to foster constructive dialogue. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.