Michael Schellenberger

The statement expresses opposition to digital IDs, suggesting that public sentiment is largely against them and implying that this could politically impact a government. The tone is critical and somewhat speculative, aiming to rally opposition.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement does not directly harm but could contribute to polarization by framing digital IDs negatively without detailed reasoning. [-1]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   It respects privacy but could be seen as dismissive of differing views, potentially leading to divisive discourse. [-1]
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The statement lacks empathy and understanding, focusing on opposition rather than constructive dialogue. [-1]
4. 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.

   It engages in criticism but lacks constructive elements, focusing on potential political consequences rather than substantive debate. [-1]