Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
10d
In reply to:
The statement is part of a public discourse discussing the implications of using AI, specifically language models like ChatGPT, in governance and policy-making. It critiques a specific report by the Trump administration, suggesting that reliance on AI may have contributed to errors in the report.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but implies criticism of a policy decision, which is a legitimate part of public discourse.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by highlighting potential issues with using AI in governance, encouraging scrutiny and discussion. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism of a policy decision without resorting to personal attacks. [+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 uses influence to question and potentially improve policy-making processes, contributing to societal betterment. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by responsibly critiquing a public policy issue. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.