Peter Wildeford (hiring!) 🇺🇸🚀
@peterwildeford
·
14d
The statement critiques the commitment of certain AI companies to safety and ethical standards, suggesting a discrepancy between their public declarations and actual practices. It engages in public discourse by addressing the societal issue of AI safety and corporate responsibility.
- The statement implies harm by suggesting hypocrisy, but it does not directly cause harm. It raises a valid concern about AI safety.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement criticizes companies but does not engage in personal attacks. It focuses on the actions and commitments of the companies rather than individuals. [+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 its platform to highlight potential issues in AI safety commitments, aiming to hold companies accountable, which can contribute to societal betterment. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement exercises free speech by critiquing corporate actions, which is a responsible use of the platform to address public concerns. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.