In reply to:
Amol Gargote
@amolgargote
·
312d
The statement engages in a public discourse about the investment in large language models (LLMs) and their perceived value versus actual utility. It challenges the notion that these technologies are worth their high valuations by comparing them to traditional software tools that have provided significant utility without being considered AGI.
- The statement does not use harmful language and maintains a neutral tone, focusing on the comparison of technologies rather than attacking individuals. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by providing a perspective on the utility of LLMs compared to traditional software, encouraging a more grounded view of their value. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by questioning the valuation of LLMs without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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 using the platform to discuss the valuation and utility of LLMs, contributing to the public discourse on technology investments. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.