Neuroethics: The Clearview Debacle

[Chip (OP)]

The conundrum:

Where they went wrong:

For and Against
--------------------------

Againt Clearview:

1."Clearview AI alledgedly gathered facial data without: the consent of the rest of their body"

No, that's actually without"the consent and authorisation of the individual's, or their guardian's, *mind".

This is so because there are neurological principles in play during facial structure formation, which over time, is morpholically determined or governed by its micro•expressions."

The first law of Neuroethics, broad-based penetrative or invasive monitoring demands full disclosure - what were Clearview afrid of by simply asking ?

It makes you wonder who the real good guys are.

In the interests of fair play where such personal data is acquired covertly whereby not having so would've hurt more than otherwise.

Akin to one such as a guardian, who makes executive decisions based on experience and logic, over their youger charge who acts on pure emotion.

But the images had a "shelf life" and we re of limited threat to the public.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/2033#:~:text=P300%20Participates%20in%20Ionizing%20Radiation