The statement engages in a debate about the definition and expectations of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), critiquing the perceived shifting of goalposts in defining AGI. It references specific criteria and predictions for AGI capabilities by 2029, suggesting a need for clear benchmarks.
- The statement uses strong language ('bullshit') which could be seen as harmful or disrespectful, potentially violating the principle of doing no harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement attempts to clarify and promote understanding of AGI by providing specific criteria and predictions, aligning with the principle of promoting understanding. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in a critique of the discourse around AGI definitions, which can be seen as constructive criticism, though the tone could be more respectful.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.