Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 133
10/2/2024, 12:27:19 AM
X
In reply to:
Ed Zitron
@edzitron
·
81d
@GaryMarcus @burkov @CIOonline You didn't link to the thing in your original post which is something you do all the time. It's both frustrating and deprives the authors of traffic and credit
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
81d
@edzitron @burkov @CIOonline The link is in his reply. Why so aggressive, mate?
Ed Zitron
@edzitron
·
81d
@GaryMarcus @burkov @CIOonline it is completely insane to respond to someone with this when you yourself didn't post the link!
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
82d
@burkov @CIOonline Link?
Andriy Burkov
@burkov
·
82d
@GaryMarcus @CIOonline Just below your post in my feed :-)
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
82d
“Devs gaining little (if anything) from coding assistants” @CIOonline

The statement addresses a public issue related to the visibility and dissemination of information on social media platforms, specifically Twitter. The conversation involves a discussion about the impact of including links in posts and how it affects the reach and engagement of the content. The tone of the statement is defensive and explanatory, aiming to justify the omission of links in the original post due to the platform's algorithmic penalties.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm by explaining the rationale behind the omission of links, which is a neutral and informative approach. [+1]
  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 by not engaging in personal attacks or revealing private information. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by providing an explanation for the behavior in question, which can foster empathy and reduce misunderstandings. [+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 engages in constructive dialogue by addressing the concerns raised and providing a reasoned explanation, rather than resorting to personal attacks. [+1]