Yes, and "don't hurt people". Worse, I don't even think those are sufficient as guiding principles. In the real world many ethical situations are not best solved by being nice or refusing to hurt someone.
How about not hurting people unnecessarily? One might say, "well, bots are not necessary, so they shouldn't ever hurt someone." If they aren't necessary, then why make them to begin with? Besides, there is no end to what someone else may determine to be hurtful. I won't play the game of trying to avoid all that is hurtful to everyone else.
The article mentions a bot using racial slurs as something to avoid. Depending on the execution, this could be distasteful at best--assuming the intention of the creator was to have the bot use these slurs. But the use of slurs by bots has largely been unintended by my reckoning. So, you are telling me someone is genuinely hurt by a malfunctioning bot using a racial slur? That says a lot more about the user than it does the creator.
