Gary Marcus

Rank 20 of 47
|
Score 39

The statement and linked article by Gary Marcus appear to engage in public discourse by discussing the internal dynamics and leadership changes within OpenAI, a significant entity in the field of artificial intelligence. The tone of the statement is critical, suggesting a negative view of OpenAI's recent developments. The inclusion of an image of a well-known figure associated with controversy (Elizabeth Holmes) on the Forbes cover may imply a comparison or a critical analogy, which could be seen as provocative.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement's critical tone could be seen as potentially harmful, especially if it is not substantiated with evidence. This could be perceived as a violation of the principle to do no harm with words and actions. [-2]
  2. 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 engage in cyberbullying or hate speech, but the use of a provocative image could be seen as disrespectful to the individuals involved, potentially violating the principle of respecting the privacy and dignity of others. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, it appears to focus on criticism and drama, which could be seen as a violation of this principle. [-1]
  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 does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. It appears to be more of a personal attack or ad hominem argument, particularly with the use of the image, which could be seen as a violation of this principle. [-2]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses the platform to criticize a significant entity in the AI field, which could be seen as using influence for societal betterment if the criticism is constructive and aimed at improvement. However, the tone and approach may undermine this potential positive impact.