Current research question, as of 01-Oct 2025:
When LOCAL advisor and consultant teams involved in #ai research violate US human subjects laws by design to make their in-country activity disappear, are highly referenced orgs such as @LondonSchoolofEconomics @MIT @SecretaryMarcoRubio responsible for the lack of INTERNATIONAL diplomatic response and sanction, or do secondary and tertiary sources (international media and network media) drive acceptance of the strategy?
What mitigates the effect of removing technocrats responsible for client-side crisis management on team function? When ai (strategic planning and communication) is used to preserve civic leaders and politicians as a privileged servant class, a group who serve at great personal expense to their freedom of moment even, as demonstrated in contextually timebound and time-sensitive politically motivated assassination replacement case studies that precede network media like those documenting the assassination of President James Garfield; in those instances, can differences in effectiveness be attributed to the range of INTERNATIONAL responses (primary, secondary, tertiary cited sources) and their promotion for recognition, or do official, non-partisan reasons for preservation supersede all other LOCAL effects?
Did this create a type of market consideration that becomes a sweepstakes for relevance that functions as marketing? In that case, the effectiveness of the marketing decides the citizens’ ability to refer to international response later. “A club that would have me.”
21-OCT edit: One suggestion:
The functional response is part of a programmatic response that would be described, due to its dependence on the media and language, as a Coercion Therapy model, designed to target international exceptionalism:
“#CoercionTherapy refers to the use of force or pressure to compel a person to receive medical treatment against their will, particularly in mental [ed note: much more behavioral] health settings. It involves both formal and informal measures.”
‘International pressure’ in this instance means the paternal or authoritarian pressures felt by citizens and residents that forces an avoidant reaction, and a retreat into requests for merciful reservation of judgment through qualifying disqualification.
To those used to thinking of language as it is being used (a product of contextual understanding and exchange), this may express itself as:
“Code fragments with broken code syntax dictating mental and social [behavioral] function.”
The mechanisms for social and subjective contextualization can be identified, and typically reside in the mass media:
1. [free form text field, demonstrating intellectual rigor]
2. Your other hypothesis, in non-narrrative form
3. Pica density of the circle’s border, as measured by optimized ink gain of medium (pica potential within a median/standard brush stroke)
4. Access to and diversity of sources, independent of literacy
5. Fad
—