In reply to:
Lewis
@ctjlewis
·
340d
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
340d
The statement is part of a broader discussion about the effectiveness of AI systems in coding compared to human coders. It questions the claim that AI systems are superior to a large majority of human coders, engaging in a debate about the practical implications of AI benchmarks.
- The statement does not use harmful language and maintains a neutral tone, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement contributes to understanding by questioning the validity of AI benchmarks, promoting a more nuanced view of AI capabilities. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by questioning a claim without resorting to personal attacks, adhering to the principle of constructive dialogue. [+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.
- The statement upholds free speech by responsibly questioning a public claim about AI, contributing to the discourse with integrity. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.