The statement from the blog etc o1/strawberry is not a robust advance on general purpose reasoning. Doesn’t sound like much of a cure for hallucinations or stupid errors, either. A better ladder will not get us to the moon. I want us to get to the moon. constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about the progress and limitations of AI technology, specifically addressing the capabilities and expectations of the o1 (Strawberry) model in the context of general-purpose reasoning and artificial general intelligence (AGI).
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words and actions. It is a critique of a technological advancement rather than a personal attack. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying the limitations of the o1 model and expressing a desire for more significant advancements. However, it could be more empathetic towards the efforts of the developers. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism of the technology rather than personal attacks. It addresses the issue at hand without resorting to ad hominem arguments. [+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 progress and limitations of AI technology. [+2]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.