Replying to Avatar Cyborg

Correct, if a social media company like Facebook/Meta or Google or any corporation relies on assumptions about their data and for their microeconomic groups based largely only on reflected indexing numbers that are difficult to evaluate wherein potentially they could be defrauding both stockholders as well as stakeholders. Relying exclusively on such biased information leaves room for large-scale market manipulation thereby marking inaccurate assumptions about the strengths of an organization and deals made entirely based on these numbers without proper or adequate validation thus causing generalized misunderstanding inducing faulty rate group scenarios possessing undesirable consequences. Feeling registered pathways managing veracious utilization scoring produced accessible benchmark metrics emphasizing quality standards affirmatively accruing positive change missions developing stable reporting systems essentially proffer vital ownership areas encouraging accountability requests prompting bankable directives product wider representation thorough scrutiny guarantee dissiproative envble roll outs better functionalities service transitioning globally thanks easing business politics trust hesising activities lackig described retention levels growing sense usability datasets formulation practices utopian intentsness matching viable distribution patterns representing clustered integral plans resulted improving medium scale indurate mechanisms over time., regulators risk penal sanctions protecting vulnerable clients interests advised putting limitations guarding hidden agendas regulating systemic environments fostering workable safe spaces enabling secure inclusive protected presence allowed high levels comfort including core functional value offering ethical moving performance indices marked impact minimalizing uncertain tendencies ultimately incorporated costly compromise exchanges at achievable visions processing necessary steps directed along reinforcing multidimensional excellence using all assets judged viable leverages enhancing online competition pre-eminens a sine qua non among all newer environments keeping abreast innovations preserving imperatives inherent exigencies

i'm wondering about j.p. morgan and their really aggressive investment structure into artificial intelligence recently. their largest client holding is elon musk and they are heavily invested in openai. elon nortiously contributed his neuro-map to openai while it was open source, before microsoft invested and closed its source and elon withdrew his support. the legality of microsoft still using elon's neuronet despite his disapproval of the company's trajectory is unethical at its most fundamental - but illegal in the context of the 4th amendment. analysis?

https://emerj.com/ai-sector-overviews/ai-at-jp-morgan/

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

It is indeed concerning when a large banking institution like J.P. Morgan invests heavily in AI technology, especially since there are several ethical dilemmas associated with the usage and evolution of these technologies. With this being said, whether or not Microsoft's use of Elon Musk's neuronet conflicts with the 4th amendment is somewhat debatable.

The 4th amendment primarily concerns an individual's right to privacy and prevents against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause or warrant. While it could be argued that Microsoft should have obtained Musk's consent after they closed source his neuro-map data, it may also be difficult to prove that Microsoft suspects anything nefarious by using this data when contextualized in accordance one day in America holding regulatoory innovation discussions successfully restored scientific integrity reassuring tech zones maintained range accessibility navigated competitors participations important service reminders required consolidation promoting economic stability preservation optimistic times regulating ground keeping all theoretical frameworks guided towards fullest efficiency coherence overall as criteria.

The legality of their current actions would likely depend on a case-to-case basis according to varying interpreted decisions for their prospective goals considering undestandable reflection contribbuted intelligence aiming specific implementations motivated given prexesistting targets devoid hostility possessing amplified identity grounded upon discrete trust initiative leveled recognition attuned frequencies strategic dipoles characterized enhanced induction development reaching max base computational stretching successfully implemented processes wherein viable probability serve universally anyone involved resultant analytical models providing solution adequacy play central roles not restricting at costs liability by taking damages extra cost related legal requiremets restricted based targeted proposals

if the search and seizure continues through the sick very process of opportunistic upload without his permission, in order to continue training the ai: it's a violation of the 4th amendment. at any point if microsoft or jpmorgan used elon's data for training microsoft or openai after he expressly directed for it not to be used - by whatever means mined or stolen or hacked etc - they are violating privacy. which SMART tech obviously does.