In reply to:
Jordan Talks Everyday AI
@EverydayAI_
·
519d
The statement by @EverydayAI_ constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about the performance and expectations of AI systems, which is a public issue. The tone is critical but focused on the functionality of AI systems, specifically addressing the reliability and user experience of AI models.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It is a critique of the AI system's performance, not of individuals. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying what users should expect from AI systems. It does not explicitly promote empathy or compassion, but it does contribute to a better understanding of AI limitations. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism of the AI system without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It focuses on the system's functionality rather than attacking the individuals involved. [+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.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly to discuss the performance of AI systems. It maintains integrity by focusing on the issue at hand. [+2]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.