Reposted by Gary Marcus
The statement critiques the prioritization of technology and innovation over human values, suggesting a societal issue worth examining. It engages with a public debate about the role of technology in society, particularly in the context of AI and legislative actions.
- The statement does not directly harm anyone with words or actions, but it does imply a critical stance towards those who prioritize technology over humanity. This is a neutral adherence to the principle.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement aims to promote understanding and awareness about the potential overemphasis on technology, which aligns with promoting empathy and compassion. However, it could be more constructive in its approach. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in a form of criticism but does not target individuals personally. It avoids ad hominem attacks and focuses on the broader issue, which is a positive adherence to the principle. [+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.
- By raising awareness about the potential pitfalls of prioritizing technology over humanity, the statement uses influence for societal betterment. This is a positive alignment with the principle. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech and uses the platform responsibly to discuss a significant societal issue, showing integrity in its expression. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.