Reposted by Peter H. Diamandis, MD
The statement and conversation suggest a call to action for technologists to aggressively pursue their goals, leveraging political connections. It implies a strategic advantage due to the presence of tech-aligned individuals in the upcoming administration.
- The statement's aggressive tone may encourage actions that could harm others, violating the principle of doing no harm. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not directly engage in cyberbullying or hate speech, but the aggressive tone could indirectly encourage such behavior. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement lacks elements of promoting understanding, empathy, or compassion, focusing instead on aggressive advancement. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, instead promoting a combative approach. [-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 uses influence to promote a specific agenda, but it is unclear if this is for the betterment of society as a whole. [-1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement exercises free speech but may not use the platform responsibly, given the aggressive and potentially divisive tone. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.