The Prohibited Artificial Intelligence Practice

Abstract

The research strives to provide a comprehensive understanding of the regulation of Artificial Intelligence (AI), known as the AI act of the European Union, with a specific focus on the regulatory challenges related to the prohibition of AI systems that deploy subliminal techniques. To achieve this, the author proposes the perspective of metaverse to enhance the user experience and biometric psychography to avoid reality eye-tracking-based models. However, the current AI act needs to be prepared to address biometrics, which merely repeats the GDPR, giving a hand to AI market growth. Regardless, the author offers four key contributions. Firstly, it shows up a course on the prohibition of AI systems contrasting to the pupillometry market that strive for an opposite course. Secondly, it clarifies the image of subliminal techniques beyond a person’s consciousness of Article 5 para 1 point (a) with reference to the ‘vulnerability’ urge as per point (b). Thirdly, the research compiles perspicuity of ‘psychological harm’ criterion through the assessment of case law practice. Finally, it proposes to fill the gaps in privacy especially when the AI system initially appears friendly but becomes tracking. To support this outcome, the manuscript refers to biometric psychography expanding the concept of biometric data for AI systems.