User:Joschtony/sandbox/place holder one

[*] ''' https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Life_of_refreshed_breathing.png
 * _
 * == Please note that this a placeholder to develop a book. ==
 * Thankfully the Creator Granted rights include revision, in that the learning curve, of had been recently informed to take down prose fiction development,  thereby the had been in place of User Joschtony namespace of sandbox of "place holder one," is for a book of essays, this is in compliance to rules of wikibooks in drafting.

* notice 08/18/2023 at 09:34 The is a placeholder, to develop fact checked Creator Granted rights are impartial,

a book of essays in that, thereby;-

There being that rights from The Creator are not ethically nor legally alienated by suppression long before 1776 in years since reference point year zero, this being true in fact.

Once source to be cited as a current decided goal, is at this online link source, ( https://apnews.com/article/humanoid-robots-better-leaders-ai-geneva The title of that article is as follows, "UN tech agency rolls out human-looking robots for questions at a Geneva news conference" published on, Published 8:23 AM EDT, July 7, 2023. The article begins by, "BERLIN (AP) — A United Nations technology agency assembled a group of robots that physically resembled humans at a news conference Friday, inviting reporters to ask them questions in an event meant to spark discussion about the future of artificial intelligence."

How is this related to basic Creator Granted rights? The ethics of nudges of human behavior expertise has been reported in an abstract titlled, "The Ethics of Nudging," at online source link as follows, ( The Ethics of Nudging (yale.edu), In one quote, ie, " "Finally, nudges should not, and need not, compromise individual dignity, which many nudges actually promote. There is, however, a genuine risk that some nudges might count as manipulation; an emphasis on welfare, autonomy, and dignity helps to show how to avoid that risk." - There has been deep concern regarding the dignity of the individual human being person, each someone in regard to "genuine risk that some nudges might count as manipulation;" - thereby;- The impartial rights from the Creator do have direct correlation to "user experience" by programmed not sentient no consciousness AI in that the faux realism of being interactive conversation has a huge human behavior expertise reality of a lure of the pre-programmed perspectives on the end user of such not sentient no consciousness natural language linguistics programmed AI. This has constatations in immersive tech, in that driving simulators or flight simulators, even sound and video of computer aided graphics gaming is one thing. However, in the history of humanity, those who orchestrate in that they have the power, prestige and influence to steer by their perspective is self evident in history of just the 20th century. How? Those who comply regardless of keep in steered parameters, at least any perspective that is public, either considered by the steered normative as not a threat to compliance, or just follow the normative for needs of spirituality and/or earthly needs, - just do not "make waves." Does this seem impossible considering the self evident history? In the Peoples Republic of China, folk recognized by being in the normative have social quality points. Once source is as follows, [ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-008-9250-7 [ "Normative Life Satisfaction in Chinese Societies"]]

One quote of the abstract just cited, "Normative Life Satisfaction in Chinese Societies" in a few sentences it is self evident the intention as been to steer societies, is as follows,

Thereby,

By the fact that I live and breath in my human spirit needing my cell respiration, and for some reason my own picture does not show up yet,

this place holder is set for the following.

This will be a place holder of a book of my files stored on usb drives, and fact checked sources, in a perspective on not sentient no consciousness AI, in that artificial intelligence can only be partly reliable such is the reliability of Grammarly, for example.

<>
 * User:Joschtony/sandbox

_________________________________