Campaigns of Artificial Intelligence Violate the Boundaries of Our Bodies: Does Participation Disqualify Political or Institutional Leaders?

• Having privacy is vital to our psychological well-being.
• This includes intentional references to our body parts -- Including our face, fingers, feet, and
  genitals.
• Artificial intelligence programs, including those of chat for more than a year, have influenced
  wording on customer service calls, other interactions, and what some of us see everywhere. Now
  how people stand (with both hands in front or behind), photos (actual or generated) on our computer, designs of objects we are sold, food or food product layouts, and what people (politicians/celebrities/actors/athletes)
  do, typos or words on text, etc. also reference our bodies.
• These can inform others of our bodily conditions or appearance (Genocide level 2:
  symbolization in which symbols are forced on to unwilling members of pariah groups).
• Those who have experienced the violation of those boundaries – whether through street
  harassment or violence (coercion, rape, incest, assault) -- may be particularly vulnerable, in addition
  to the young and elderly.
• Major companies (and by extension, technology and the government) have been told this is
  harmful for years.
• We need accountability to determine the origin of any campaigns involving body parts.
• Appeals to multinationals and injury from experimentation do not stop behavior based on rule�based algorithms in further violation of the Nurembourg Code.
• Everyone needs the right to refuse involvement with those who are willing to participate in those campaigns, or do so.
• We societally and individually, need to figure out when should such behavior (or
  participation in illegal human experimentation) be disqualifying for a job or social
  connection?

From Zuboff: “The boundaries of our bodies are important. “In Psychological Functions of Privacy,” Darhl
Pederson defines privacy as a “boundary control process” that invokes the decision rights associated
with “restricting and seeking interaction.” Pederson’s research identifies six categories or privacy
behaviors: solitude, isolation, anonymity, reserve, intimacy with friends, and intimacy with family. His
study shows that these varied behaviors accomplish a rich array of complex psychological ‘privacy
functions’ considered salient for psychological health and development success: contemplation,
autonomy, rejuvenation, confiding, freedom, creativity, recovery, catharsis and concealment. These are
experiences without which we can neither flourish nor usefully contribute to our families.
communities, and society.”

A major focus of artificial intelligence is "health," with those in the industry long proclaiming their right to
have private information about our health (protected medically through HIPAA), and their plans to
exploit it.

Exploitation (health based artificial intelligence campaigns) are comprehensive including attempts to
fully understand and exploit our social contacts, bodily health and functions, private thoughts, private
interactions with friends, and thoughts, mood, and voice (see Spotify patent to determine 100 indicators
from our voices.)

References to Face and Neck

Starting in December 2021, if not earlier, campaigns to have people touch or scratch their face, neck, or
hair occurred.

President Joe Biden in January 2022 made a speech in which he said something like, “the goal is to save
you, not control you.” Twice (I believe) he touched or scratched his face or hair.

This rule was rolled out so ubiquitously that customer service staff (Uber drivers, hotel check in clerks, airline employees, and others), and individuals would ensure this would occur in one's vision every few minutes, or seconds, often with individuals where interaction was required, or places where one's presence coudl be expected.

This experimentation (see section on the Nurembourg Code) caused injury, including temporary or permanent brain damage and psychological stress, yet extensive notification of leaders and multinationals did not end the behavior.

Whatever would cause this behavior to be done was gathered in violation of the Fourth Amendment of
the Constitution. It potentially deprives one of both “life” and “liberty” referenced in that same
document. It also stands in violation of the Nurembourg Code, which lays out principles for human
experimentation (see the Appendix).

Therefore it is not legal or ethical for our government to participate in such experiments.

References to Genitals

Similarly, for many months, people and objects have referenced the private parts of Americans.

This has included the intentional use of words containing parts of a word referring to a private part, with use expanded through contacts, locations, items, etc., once companies were notified of its harm.

People been standing in such a way to have their hands over their
genitals (front or back) in person or in photos. Joe (and I believe Jill Biden) were photographed in such a manner, facing the camera on September 4.

The appearance of private parts has also been included in computer images through Microsoft (consider a boycott), food designs.

This started in August 2022 or earlier, and has expanded.

Again, this has been rolled out to anyone one might contact in a personal or business setting, including family, friends,
neighbors, shop keepers, real estate agents, etc. This is after word references to body parts which have
been going on for far longer, and were noted as being extremely injurious.

For a president who was a major leader in the “It’s On Us” campaign against sexual violence (flawed,
given peers are not responsible for stopping violence), it is particularly difficult to believe they support
references to genitalia and body parts in a country where sexual violence is common and rarely effectively prosecuted.

Other Related Campaigns

What is mentioned here is just a small section of what is being done to surveil and manipulate people. Campaigns regarding hands and feet are also used, and references to grooming (hair cutting, etc.).

Having others reference one’s body breaks down boundaries that may make one more vulnerable to
sexual exploitation also. The manipulation of virtually every text or the use of prices, words, letters, etc.,
in computer programs, applications and products to reference sexual activities and body parts is also
widespread. Food – either in menu items or how it is laid out – also has often referenced one’s body. Numerous misspellings introduced in texts (necessarily to communicate with family) are also made on a daily or hourly basis.

Consequences

Bringing together two themes:

“’Goldstone did not perform the role of the Jewish liberal,’ Finkelstein said, ‘which is to be
anguished, but no consequences. And all of a sudden Israeli liberal Jews are discovering, hey, there
are consequences for committing war crimes. You don’t just get to walk into the sunset and look
beautiful. They can’t believe it. They are genuinely shocked. ‘Aren’t our tears consequences
enough? Aren’t our long eyes and broken hearts consequences enough?’’ ‘No,’ he said,, ‘you have
to go to the criminal court.’” (Hedges, written in November 2017 in a document that has since been edited for this site.)

I believe the president’s leadership in artificial intelligence campaigns referencing body parts raises questions about his qualification to be United States president and serve the public, including following national and international laws and moral codes. The rollout of artificial intelligence and 5G while he was president do also, short of a discussion of what has happened and a rollback of many practices, even repeatedly called for by those working in senior positions in artificial intelligence.

Some questions, that should be asked by every media outlet, include:

• Are campaigns referencing bodies being used (or will they be used) with children or babies?
• If not, how would a child avoid this exposure?
• What would they learn about the boundaries of their bodies from this?
• What does governemnt research (and that reviewed or published on government websites) tell us about the damage from ignoring bodily boundaries (for all individuals)?
• What other evidences is there of the consequences of such campaigns, psychologically?
• How many times have they resulted in psychological or physical injury?
• How many individuals have experienced negative effects?
• Won’t documentation of these harms just result in that (or related) behavior increasing, given
  such responses in the past, which seek emotional reactions for monetization or other benefit by those working in or with AI companies?
• Are not these campaigns illegal and/or unethical?
• What do they reference from a public health perspective and why is it not being communicated? (This may link to the OpenAI lawsuit by Elon Musk also.)