Stopping Artificial Intelligence’s Abuses Should Our Top Voting Priority

• The greatest challenge of our time is stopping artificial intelligence, controlling exposure to the
  infrastructure on which it is based, and limiting or stopping surveillance. Voters should make this technological threat to everyone on our planet -- particularly vulnerable
  populations like the elderly, children, and electrosensitive – their top priority for action.
  
• If a candidate does not have a viable platform, the voter may consider not voting.
  
• Not promoting an effective mechanism to maintain safe and healthy living conditions,
  compensation and other reparations for damage based on the harm from artificial intelligence
  (even one time) should be disqualifying for a candidate.
  
• Much more work need to done to demand those in power serve the people to change this reality.

Particularly worrying is the government's lack of transparency with respect to AI. Even while Congress is focused on the issue with respect to hearings, government officials are continuing the program. For example, the Commerce Secretary has cited development of new semiconductor chips to use AI, without referencing the myriad of issues on this site.

We must ask: should Congress defund contracts and programs using artificial intelligence, or parts of them that do so? While the government may use terms like national security, national defense, or financial technology, such terms have been used in the past to justify the misappropriation of funds, a lack of Congressional and public oversight, and a continuation of programs that harm large numbers of Americans.

Given extensive documentation of harms to the government and multinationals, the extensive questions asked by leading institutions as to the legality of AI practices and programs, the viability of a AI-free economy a few years ago, and a record of extensive harm by radiation (which appears an implicit justification of AI and expansion of radiation), it appears a dangerous course for this nation (and world.) Doubtlessly, many nations would work together on such efforts to control what amount to weapons surveilling thought and influencing or coercing action, given United States' leadership.