Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
9/5/2024, 2:38:37 PM
X
In reply to:
Steven Marlow
@sd_marlow
·
502d
@GaryMarcus TV, media personalities, "news influencers," whatever.
Your tweets mirror the same kind of activism, where one ideology is only ever great, and the other is only ever bad.
And you don't "let it go," to the point of having nested RT's of yourself.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
502d
@sd_marlow um, i don’t get my news from TV, and this is really unpleasant given our heretofore cordial history.
Steven Marlow
@sd_marlow
·
502d
@GaryMarcus A lot of people in the AI space can see you're in a CNN/MSNBC bubble. Worse, your like a dog with a bone (for AI stuff and now politics).
When you leave this platform for the 'serious science people' one, don't bring the baggage with you; else, maybe it's a you problem.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
502d
What has and has not changed around here:

Twitter, pre Elon: leaned on by US government, to suppress hate speech and lies

X: indirectly influenced by Russian government, to amplify hate speech and lies

Honestly, I prefer the old days.

The statement by @GaryMarcus constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive debate about ideological biases, media influence, and political issues. The tone is defensive and assertive, aiming to clarify the speaker's stance and actions in response to accusations of ideological bias.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the defensive tone could escalate the conflict.
  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 the privacy and dignity of others, avoiding cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; it is more focused on defending the speaker's actions.
  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 dialogue but does not fully avoid personal attacks, as it implies the other party's criticism is unfounded. [-1]
  5. 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 to clarify the speaker's stance, but the tone could be more constructive. [+1]