ChatGPT: No Basis for the 501c3 Exemption, Should Be Investigated vis-à-vis Nurembourg and the Constitution Now

• Critical questions must be asked about the illegal ChatGPT and artificial intelligence, to include generative AI and images.
• Chat’s takeover of speech destroys relationships and communication: Call out its illegality, offer Chat�free relationships and organizations (including in products) and remove it’s 501c3 designation.
• In contrast to promises of benefits to humanity, there is extensive evidence of harms with harmful words and images (or types of images) expanded in scope after documentation of harms. The research is also not available to the public (with a short review of the Elon Musk case against OpenAI appearing to make salient points.)

A similar article was published in Novemer 2023.

The “chat line” with customer initiated sexual communication was a potentially legitimate business
model (with far more attractive people.) (Perhaps this should be removed after Jeff Bezos'/Washington Post article appearting to justify AI porn with what appears to be less pay, more brutality, and more manipulation of customers. The private equity funders are enthusiastic. This tells you what you need to know about many in charge now.)

In contrast, ChatGPT is an attempt to fundamentally change the use of language and communication.

Given the Nurembourg Code and the MK Ultra investigation, it is clear that artificial intelligence is a
dangerous and internationally unacceptable method of experimentation.

However “chat” programs are particularly deceptive. They attempt to use citizens as the means of
personal data capture, and manipulate behavior through each exchange of communication. Those who
change our language book the profits or rewards from changing outcomes.

ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence programs rely on a process and infrastructure devoid of
meaningful consent, while far more intrusive than Communist and totalitarian surveillance.

The creation of algorithms (and large language models) violates both consent and the intent or
guidelines for ethical experimentation.

It reflects both extreme physical-based stress and damage from the environment and devices, and
manipulation through sights, sounds, contacts, noises, and shocks. Therefore, beyond the impossibility
of created an ethical experiment using artificial intelligence in operation, it is an experiment that relies
on subjects abused by the experimenter (and their rules), whose behavior reflects being subject to
extensive secretive harassing, stalking, and experimentation. Many of us see individuals afraid of saying
something negative today, or who feel better when they are positive, without knowing why their
personality has changed.

Thus creation of algorithms and implementation of “rules” violates international law.

Many of us surely can speak to the harms which we have experienced or documented (for me, both
extensively), because the form of experimentation is not consistent with international guidelines, and
how it continued for years after notification of severe harm.

Indeed, were people to understand it, both technology companies (surely in some form of conspiracy or
using racketeering) would face significant liability and little profit as people would not give consent.

Most people have enough challenges without having references to people who abuse them, health
conditions or sexual references be necessary for interactions necessary for every day like banking
transactions, booking a flight, buying a needed product, or going out in public.

We have a right to computers, internet of things, and applications that avoid chat and other
personalization, or conversational or other design that can be utilized for artificial intelligence.

Programs that have simple, solid, background colors, and clear and concise words and phrases with no
artificial intelligent input or conversational style, that are documented. Those that avoid: double,
triple or quadruple entendres (or meanings), greetings, inappropriate capitalization, abbreviations,
italicization or bolding or otherwise emphasis of letters, photographs of people, advertising,
emoticons, cartoon characters, purposeful use or change of colors, photographs, and background
designs.

Therefore the 501c3 designation should be immediately removed to remove the tax exemption of
contributions, and organizations investigated and potentially shut down.