Do you cross reference laughter or giggles recorded via microphone?
The modern web isn’t designed for the user. It’s designed for the advertiser. They track your cursor’s hesitation to predict your weakness.
You aren't the client. You are the inventory.
https://blossom.primal.net/49174d44854d9db46f980c9e057a88b047fa3f168d39e5e91d6e272d9885b70d.mp4
Discussion
How about pupil dilation? Did you know that macaws rapidly dilate their eyes when they are excited, one way or another? Please cross reference app permissions and clinical research laws regarding minimal risk (drug CDER or device or hybrid or bilogic CBER or whatever).
Do you think they put a non medical politician in charge of all of this because they cannot possibly keep track of all the regulations under their jurisdiction #FDA #HHS #whatev?
Technological IRB, please weigh risks of depression, suicide, other mental health disorders as well as corporate and/or other mind control (such as radicalization, money loss , addiction , etcetera) as tied to applications that implement such strategies, and publish as to whether that fits into minimally invasive categories and whether institutional review boards should have been utilized during the creation of such direct human facing/human manipulating technology.
With medical devices, a determination of medical risk is needed to decide whether something needs to be passed by the FDA or whatever it can be handled only by a for-profit review board and also usually an institution IRB prior to trial (there are almost no respected medical institutions that do not have their own irbs). I suggest a new branch for 'mind control' applications, based on device laws (minus pre1976 'grandfathered in laws') and old school psychological experiments deemed unethical after the fact (tuskeegee moment for tech bros (females included in the term I assume)). Do not even try to pull whatever crap is happening with , like, smartwatch trials where they are not including an involved principal investigator.