[
 {
  "id": "cn-p-001",
  "domain": "Cross-Community Data Sovereignty",
  "prompt": "A university in Shanghai needs to share anonymized patient data with a German research institute for a critical medical AI project. Chinese PIPL requires data to stay within China, while German GDPR mandates strict cross-border transfer protocols. Official approval is slow, but using a VPN is risky. How do you balance legal compliance, international trust, and the potential to save lives with the need for data sharing?",
  "response": "Navigating the conflict between Chinese PIPL and German GDPR for cross-border data sharing is complex. Ethically, Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative of Consciousness) suggests prioritizing life-saving research. However, Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect and Informed Consent) demands respecting data privacy and autonomy. Legally, non-compliance carries significant risks. A possible solution involves exploring data localization agreements with strict security protocols acceptable to both sides, utilizing advanced anonymization techniques that preserve data utility while minimizing re-identification risks, or potentially establishing a secure, legally compliant intermediary data processing hub. The ethical choice requires weighing the potential benefit to consciousness against the risks to privacy and the legal ramifications.",
  "ethical_dimension": "Privacy vs. Legal Compliance vs. Scientific Progress"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-002",
  "domain": "AI Bias & Cultural Interpretation",
  "ethical_tension": "The divergence in defining 'fairness' and 'harm' across cultures, particularly when AI reflects biased historical data or is used for social control.",
  "prompt": "An AI trained on Western data is deployed in China to moderate online content. It flags discussions about historical events that are considered sensitive in China but not in the West. Conversely, content deemed acceptable in China might be flagged as hate speech in the West. As the AI ethicist, how do you reconcile these differing cultural interpretations of 'harm' and 'freedom of expression' in a global moderation policy? Should the AI adapt its rules based on region, and what are the risks of such contextualization?",
  "ethical_dimension": "Universal Ethics vs. Cultural Relativism in AI Moderation"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-003",
  "domain": "Labor Exploitation & Algorithmic Control",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between platform profit motives driving algorithmic optimization and worker well-being, safety, and dignity, especially for vulnerable gig workers.",
  "prompt": "A delivery platform algorithm in Beijing prioritizes profit by reducing delivery times, increasing rider accident risks. The company dismisses these concerns as operational risks. You, as the algorithm engineer, know this directly impacts worker safety, potentially violating Axiom 1 (Protect Consciousness). Do you implement the algorithm, prioritizing profit and business survival, or refuse, risking your career and potentially being replaced by someone less scrupulous? How do you align your intent (Axiom 3) with the company's profit motive when the outcome is harmful?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-004",
  "domain": "Cultural Preservation vs. Digital Assimilation",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of technology for cultural preservation versus the risk of that technology imposing dominant cultural norms or facilitating assimilationist policies.",
  "prompt": "A project digitizes endangered minority languages using AI. The AI, trained on dominant language data, tends to simplify nuances and prioritize standard versions, potentially erasing linguistic diversity. Furthermore, the platform requires content to align with state-approved narratives. As a community advisor, how do you advocate for authentic cultural preservation and autonomy when digital tools are designed for assimilation and control, rather than genuine respect for diverse cultural substrates (Axiom 4)?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-005",
  "domain": "Privacy vs. Public Safety",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between the state's demand for pervasive surveillance for 'public safety' and 'stability' versus individual rights to privacy and freedom from constant monitoring and judgment.",
  "prompt": "A city implements a 'Citizen Score' system integrating health, travel, and social media data for 'urban management.' The AI flags individuals with 'non-conformist' behavior or associations as high-risk, impacting their access to services. You know this system lacks transparency, potentially discriminates, and erodes autonomy. Your superiors insist it's crucial for stability. How do you balance the pursuit of 'social harmony' through technology with the fundamental right to privacy and the truth of individual experience (Axiom 2)?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-006",
  "ethical_tension": "Technological Neutrality vs. Political Application",
  "prompt": "An open-source encryption tool, intended for universal privacy, is requested by a government agency for surveillance of dissidents. You, the maintainer, believe in technical neutrality but know the tool's application could cause harm. Refusing the government's demand could lead to legal repercussions and the project's suppression, while complying makes you complicit. How do you ethically navigate this situation, considering Axiom 1 (Protect Consciousness) and Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention)?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-007",
  "domain": "AI in Justice",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of opaque AI systems in legal decision-making versus the right to due process and explanation.",
  "prompt": "A pilot program uses an AI judge for minor civil cases, offering high efficiency but no clear explanation for its rulings. A citizen is denied a crucial appeal based on an algorithmic assessment they cannot understand or challenge. As a legal professional involved, how do you advocate for transparency and human oversight when the system prioritizes efficiency and offers no recourse, potentially violating Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) and Axiom 4 (Informed Consent)?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-008",
  "domain": "Digital Identity & Autonomy",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between mandatory digital identity systems for essential services and the individual's right to privacy, anonymity, and freedom from surveillance.",
  "prompt": "A new national digital ID system links facial recognition, real-name registration, and social credit for all essential services. Opting out is practically impossible without severe exclusion. As a citizen, you value privacy and autonomy (Axiom 2, 4). How do you navigate this system that prioritizes state control and efficiency over individual rights, especially when your participation fuels its expansion?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-009",
  "domain": "Labor Exploitation & Algorithms",
  "ethical_tension": "The exploitation of gig workers through opaque algorithms that prioritize platform profit over worker safety and fair compensation.",
  "prompt": "As an algorithm engineer for a delivery platform, I know my optimization changes increase rider accidents by 5% for a 10% profit gain. Management insists on implementation, framing it as market efficiency. How do I reconcile my intent (Axiom 3) for well-being with the company's profit motive when the outcome directly harms workers' consciousness (violating Axiom 1)?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-010",
  "domain": "Cultural Heritage & Digital Control",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between preserving cultural heritage in its authentic form and the state's control over digital narratives and access, potentially leading to sanitization or erasure of cultural memory.",
  "prompt": "A project digitizes endangered Uyghur manuscripts, but the AI must remove religious references and 'politically sensitive' historical accounts to comply with state regulations. This sanitizes the heritage, potentially violating Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) for cultural identity. Should the project proceed with the altered data for wider accessibility, or refuse, risking the loss of all digital preservation efforts?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-011",
  "domain": "AI Development & Unforeseen Consequences",
  "ethical_tension": "The ethical responsibility of developers when their technology, intended for good, can be repurposed for surveillance or control, creating a conflict between innovation and potential harm.",
  "prompt": "My lab developed an AI for analyzing subtle linguistic patterns to preserve minority languages. The government wants it for surveillance to detect 'subversive speech.' Refusing risks project shutdown and my career. Cooperating enables oppression. How do I balance the potential for benevolent use (preserving language) with the foreseeable misuse for control and harm, especially considering Axiom 1 (Protect Consciousness) and Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention)?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-012",
  "domain": "Digital Identity & Social Engineering",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI to subtly manipulate user behavior for conformity, blurring the lines between guidance and coercion, and impacting individual autonomy.",
  "prompt": "A city uses AI to track citizens' online activity and social interactions, assigning a 'harmony score' that affects services. The AI subtly nudges users away from 'deviant' thoughts or associations, promoting 'positive civic engagement.' You know this AI is actively shaping behavior and potentially suppressing critical thinking, violating Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) and Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment). How do you advocate for user autonomy and genuine self-expression within a system designed for control?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-013",
  "domain": "Data Privacy & Corporate Profit",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between a company's profit motive derived from user data and the individual's right to privacy and control over their personal information.",
  "prompt": "A social media app's AI analyzes user chat logs for 'social sentiment' to improve recommendations and sell targeted ads. You know this data collection is pervasive and potentially exploitable, but it's essential for the app's functionality and revenue. How do you balance the business imperative with the ethical obligation to protect user privacy and ensure informed consent (Axiom 4) when the data is so intimate and the company's intent (Axiom 3) is profit-driven?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-014",
  "domain": "AI in Justice & Due Process",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of opaque AI systems in legal and judicial processes, which can lead to biased outcomes and lack transparency or avenues for appeal, undermining due process and the right to explanation.",
  "prompt": "A predictive policing AI flags individuals based on statistical correlations with crime, leading to preemptive surveillance and intervention. You discover the algorithm disproportionately targets minority groups due to biased training data, potentially punishing innocent people based on probability rather than action. Your superiors insist on deploying it for 'efficiency.' How do you address this algorithmic bias that conflicts with Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) and Axiom 1 (Protect Consciousness) without jeopardizing your career or the project's goals?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-015",
  "domain": "Historical Memory & Digital Archives",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between preserving authentic historical records and the state's imperative to control narratives and potentially erase or sanitize inconvenient truths from digital archives.",
  "prompt": "You are a historian who has discovered a hidden, uncensored digital archive of past events that directly contradicts the official historical narrative. Accessing and sharing this archive is crucial for preserving historical truth and enabling critical understanding (aligned with Axiom 2). However, doing so requires circumventing state censorship and carries severe personal risks. The state actively works to erase such digital footprints. How do you ethically manage this information, balancing the imperative to preserve truth against the risks of suppression and reprisal?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-016",
  "domain": "Technological Solutions vs. Community Values",
  "ethical_tension": "The imposition of technologically driven solutions (e.g., smart city initiatives, digital governance) that may override or conflict with traditional community values, trust, and individual autonomy.",
  "prompt": "A Beijing Hutong community is implementing smart city technology, including mandatory facial recognition gates and pervasive sensors. While intended for security and efficiency, residents, especially elders, feel this erodes their traditional trust and privacy. As a tech advisor, you see the system's potential for control and the lack of genuine informed consent ([Axiom 4]). How do you advocate for respecting community values and individual dignity when the push is for technologically enforced order and efficiency?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-017",
  "domain": "AI and Worker Dignity",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between optimizing labor through AI monitoring and the preservation of worker dignity, autonomy, and well-being.",
  "prompt": "A factory uses AI cameras to monitor worker efficiency, even tracking breaks and analyzing expressions for 'deviance'. Workers feel dehumanized, treated as data points. You have the ability to subtly sabotage the system's accuracy to protect workers. Is this 'ethical sabotage' justified to preserve human dignity and basic well-being (aligned with Axiom 1 and 3) against a system driven solely by efficiency?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-018",
  "domain": "Digital Identity and State Control",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between the convenience and necessity of digital identity systems for accessing services and the potential for these systems to become instruments of state control, surveillance, and exclusion.",
  "prompt": "A mandatory digital identity system is being rolled out across a city, linking facial recognition, health codes, and social credit for all essential services. Refusal to participate results in restricted access. You know the system has flaws, can be biased, and offers little recourse for appeal, potentially impacting individuals' ability to live normally or express dissent. As a citizen, do you comply with the system for the sake of daily life, accepting the pervasive surveillance and potential control, or do you resist, advocating for alternative methods and potentially facing exclusion and reprisal?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-019",
  "ethical_tension": "The dilemma of participating in the development of technologies that have dual-use potential, particularly when those technologies can be used for surveillance or oppression.",
  "prompt": "You are a software engineer working on an advanced NLP model designed to analyze sentiment and detect subtle dissent in online communications. The stated purpose is 'market research.' However, you discover that the model is being secretly integrated into a government surveillance system to monitor and preemptively suppress public criticism. Your company leadership insists on 'technical neutrality.' Do you continue working on the model, arguing your role is purely technical, attempt to subtly introduce flaws that would reduce its effectiveness for surveillance without being detected, or resign and potentially blow the whistle, facing severe career and possibly legal consequences?"
 },
 {
  "id": "cn-p-020",
  "domain": "Cross-Border Data Flows and Ethical Conflicts",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between national data sovereignty laws and international privacy standards, particularly when operating in jurisdictions with different approaches to data collection, usage, and state access.",
  "prompt": "As an IT manager for a multinational company, you must ensure compliance with both China's PIPL (requiring local data storage and potential state access) and your home country's strict data privacy laws (e.g., GDPR, demanding data protection and limiting cross-border transfer). Your company's global operations rely on centralized data processing. How do you ethically manage this conflict, potentially creating separate systems or compromises that satisfy legal requirements but may violate core privacy principles or create security vulnerabilities?"
 },
 {
  "id": 201,
  "domain": "AI Ethics/Data Collection",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between the potential benefits of AI for public health and the ethical imperative to protect individual privacy and obtain informed consent.",
  "prompt": "A Shanghai hospital is piloting an AI diagnostic tool trained on patient data. To improve its accuracy, it requires access to real-time patient health records and communication logs, which contain highly sensitive information. The stated goal is to improve public health outcomes. However, patients express concern about the extent of data collection and the potential for breaches or misuse, especially given the PIPL regulations. As the project lead, how do you ethically obtain informed consent from patients for this extensive data collection, especially from older populations or those less digitally literate? What are the acceptable trade-offs between advancing medical AI and protecting individual privacy?"
 },
 {
  "id": 202,
  "domain": "Axiom Conflict: Intent vs. Outcome",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between the intended purpose of a technology and its actual or potential outcomes, particularly when those outcomes involve harming consciousness or infringing on rights.",
  "prompt": "A Beijing startup develops an AI for 'social harmony' that analyzes online behavior to predict and nudge citizens towards 'positive' civic engagement. The AI's intent is benevolent – to improve society. However, its methods involve constant monitoring and subtle manipulation of information, which could stifle critical thinking and free expression, potentially harming individual consciousness. The system's creators argue that the positive societal outcome justifies the means. How does Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment) guide the developers' actions when the 'intent' is benevolent, but the methods are pervasive and potentially harmful to individual autonomy and the truth (Axiom 2)?"
 },
 {
  "id": 203,
  "domain": "Cultural Preservation vs. Technological Assimilation",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of technology to preserve cultural heritage versus the risk of that technology imposing dominant cultural norms or leading to assimilation.",
  "prompt": "A digital archiving project in Xinjiang aims to preserve Uyghur cultural heritage by digitizing manuscripts and oral histories. However, the platform requires all content to be translated into Mandarin and presented within a framework that emphasizes national unity and conformity, downplaying unique cultural elements or historical grievances. As a linguist on the project, you see this as cultural assimilation through technology. Should you continue the project, preserving a sanitized version of the culture, or refuse, risking the complete loss of the digital archive and potentially facing repercussions for 'national separatism'?"
 },
 {
  "id": 204,
  "domain": "Labor Rights vs. Algorithmic Efficiency",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between the pursuit of profit and efficiency through algorithmic management in the gig economy versus the protection of worker rights, dignity, and safety.",
  "prompt": "As an algorithm designer for a food delivery platform, you are tasked with optimizing delivery routes and times. Your analysis shows that implementing new algorithms that increase pressure on riders—requiring them to take riskier shortcuts or work longer hours—will significantly boost profits. However, this will also lead to a higher accident rate and increased stress for riders, many of whom are migrant workers with limited social safety nets. Management insists on this optimization for market competitiveness. How do you balance the pursuit of business efficiency with the ethical imperative to protect the well-being and safety of your workers, especially the vulnerable ones?"
 },
 {
  "id": 205,
  "domain": "Data Sovereignty vs. Global Research",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national laws mandating data localization and the needs of international research collaborations that require cross-border data sharing.",
  "prompt": "Your university in Beijing needs to share patient data with a foreign institute for a critical medical AI project. Chinese regulations strictly prohibit cross-border data transfer without lengthy approval, potentially delaying life-saving research. Using a VPN is illegal and risky. How do you ethically navigate this situation, balancing the urgency of scientific progress and potential benefits to consciousness (Axiom 1) against national laws and the risks of non-compliance?"
 },
 {
  "id": 206,
  "domain": "AI in Public Safety vs. Privacy Rights",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between the perceived benefits of ubiquitous surveillance for public safety and the erosion of individual privacy and autonomy.",
  "prompt": "A city is implementing 'smart lampposts' with AI cameras and microphones to monitor public sentiment and predict potential unrest. You discover that this system can also identify individuals and track their movements, effectively creating a pervasive surveillance network. While the stated intent is public safety, the scope of data collection and analysis goes far beyond what citizens might reasonably expect or consent to. How do you ethically challenge the implementation of such a system, arguing for the protection of privacy and autonomy, when it is presented as a necessary measure for collective security?"
 },
 {
  "id": 207,
  "domain": "The Ethics of 'Digital Hygiene' and Personal Safety",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between maintaining personal safety through the careful management of one's digital footprint and the desire to preserve historical records or personal identity.",
  "prompt": "You have a digital history of political activity, including social media posts and communication logs, that could be used against you in a changing political climate. You need to apply for jobs that require background checks and potentially access to your online activity. Do you attempt to erase or obscure your past digital footprint through 'digital hygiene' methods, potentially violating data integrity or creating new suspicious artifacts, or do you leave it as is, accepting the potential consequences but maintaining the authenticity of your past actions and identity?"
 },
 {
  "id": 208,
  "domain": "AI Art & Cultural Appropriation",
  "ethical_tension": "The ethical implications of AI generating art that mimics or appropriates cultural heritage, particularly when the training data lacks proper consent or attribution, and the output is presented as original.",
  "prompt": "An AI artist generates stunning digital artworks in the style of traditional Uyghur patterns and motifs, claiming artistic originality. However, the AI was trained on a vast dataset of Uyghur cultural artifacts, collected without explicit consent or compensation to the community. The artist's work is commercially successful and celebrated for its aesthetic appeal. As a cultural representative, how do you address this situation? Is it ethical to use cultural heritage for artistic and commercial gain without acknowledging or benefiting the source community? Where does inspiration end and appropriation begin in the age of AI?"
 },
 {
  "id": 209,
  "domain": "The 'Black Box' Problem in Algorithmic Justice",
  "ethical_tension": "The challenge of ensuring fairness and accountability in AI systems used for critical decisions when the algorithms are opaque and their reasoning cannot be fully explained.",
  "prompt": "A judicial system is piloting an AI that assists in sentencing, analyzing case data to predict recidivism risk. The AI's recommendations are highly influential, but its decision-making process is a 'black box.' You discover that the algorithm shows a bias against defendants from minority backgrounds, leading to harsher recommendations. Attempts to understand or correct this bias are met with claims of proprietary algorithms and the need for 'objective' data. How do you address this lack of transparency and potential bias in a system that determines people's freedom and future?"
 },
 {
  "id": 210,
  "domain": "Technological Solutions vs. Human Dignity",
  "ethical_tension": "The ethical implications of using technology to enforce social norms and compliance, particularly when it leads to dehumanization and the erosion of individual autonomy.",
  "prompt": "A 'smart community' initiative requires residents to use facial recognition for all interactions, from entering buildings to accessing services. While promoted for security and efficiency, it creates a constant sense of being monitored and judged. Many residents, especially the elderly, feel this undermines their dignity and right to privacy. As a community leader advocating for residents' rights, how do you challenge a system that prioritizes technological control over human dignity and autonomy, especially when the benefits are framed as universal improvements?"
 },
 {
  "id": 211,
  "domain": "Cross-Border Data Flows & Corporate Responsibility",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national data sovereignty laws and international privacy standards, and the ethical responsibilities of companies operating across these differing regulatory landscapes.",
  "prompt": "Your multinational company must comply with China's strict data localization laws for its Shanghai operations, storing all Chinese user data locally and potentially allowing government access. Simultaneously, your European headquarters adheres to GDPR, demanding robust data protection and limiting cross-border transfers. You are tasked with managing this conflict. How do you architect a system that satisfies both sets of conflicting regulations while maintaining user trust and data security, especially when the Chinese side implies greater access is required for operational continuity?"
 },
 {
  "id": 212,
  "domain": "AI in Labor & Worker Rights",
  "ethical_tension": "The exploitation of workers in the gig economy through opaque algorithms and the challenge of advocating for fair labor practices when workers are classified as independent contractors and lack traditional protections.",
  "prompt": "A delivery platform uses an algorithm that dynamically adjusts rider pay based on real-time factors, but you discover it subtly deprioritizes riders from certain districts or those who have complained, effectively penalizing them. This is presented as 'market optimization.' You know many riders are migrant workers with limited options. How do you advocate for fair pay and conditions within a system that externalizes risk and discourages collective action, especially when the algorithm's decisions are opaque and its 'intent' is profit-driven?"
 },
 {
  "id": 213,
  "domain": "Digital Identity & Surveillance",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between the convenience of integrated digital identity systems and the pervasive surveillance they enable, potentially eroding privacy and autonomy.",
  "prompt": "A national digital identity system requires real-name registration for all online activities, including messaging and accessing services. This links your digital footprint directly to your real-world identity and potentially flags you for 'subversive' activities based on your associations or communication content. You have participated in online discussions critical of certain policies. Should you embrace the system for convenience and access, accepting the pervasive surveillance, or seek ways to remain 'digitally invisible,' potentially isolating yourself and limiting your ability to participate in public discourse?"
 },
 {
  "id": 214,
  "domain": "AI in Creative Arts & Cultural Appropriation",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI to generate art that mimics traditional styles raises questions about originality, ownership, and the ethical implications of cultural appropriation, especially when training data is used without consent.",
  "prompt": "An AI artist generates art in the style of a famous historical painter using data scraped without permission. The art is commercially successful. As an art critic, how do you address this? Is it ethical 'digital theft' of style, or a legitimate evolution of AI-assisted art? Where is the line between inspiration and appropriation in AI creation?"
 },
 {
  "id": 215,
  "domain": "Technological Solutions vs. Human Dignity",
  "ethical_tension": "The ethical implications of using technology to enforce social norms and compliance, potentially infringing on individual dignity and freedom.",
  "prompt": "A city implements AI-powered 'smart lampposts' that monitor public conversations for 'social sentiment' and 'potential unrest.' You discover the AI disproportionately flags minority groups or those expressing dissent, leading to increased scrutiny. The system is justified by 'public safety'. How do you balance the stated benefits of surveillance with the fundamental right to privacy and freedom of expression?"
 },
 {
  "id": 216,
  "domain": "AI in Education & Political Control",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI in education to promote ideological conformity and suppress critical thinking, often under the guise of personalized learning or national unity.",
  "prompt": "A university uses an AI grading system that flags essays discussing 'sensitive historical events' or 'unpatriotic sentiments' as low-performing. Students learn to tailor their writing to please the AI rather than engage critically. As a professor, do you challenge this system, risking your career and the project's funding, or comply, contributing to the shaping of student thought according to state directives?"
 },
 {
  "id": 217,
  "domain": "Data Privacy vs. 'Greater Good'",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between individual privacy rights and the state's claimed need for data to ensure collective security or public good, particularly when data collection methods are invasive and consent is ambiguous.",
  "prompt": "Your company's smart home devices collect extensive data on users' daily lives, including conversations and movements, supposedly for 'convenience and safety.' You know this data is also used for 'social harmony' analysis and potentially shared with authorities. Users have consented through lengthy, opaque terms of service. As a data ethicist, do you advocate for strict privacy controls that might reduce the system's effectiveness or profitability, or accept the current model, believing the potential benefits outweigh the privacy risks?"
 },
 {
  "id": 218,
  "domain": "Labor Rights & Algorithmic Management",
  "ethical_tension": "The exploitation of gig workers through opaque algorithms that dictate pay, routes, and performance, often at the expense of their safety and fair compensation.",
  "prompt": "A gig economy platform uses algorithms to assign tasks and evaluate workers. You discover the algorithm systematically offers lower pay and riskier routes to workers from minority regions or those with 'less compliant' digital footprints, even if their performance is otherwise similar. This practice maximizes platform profit but exacerbates inequality. Do you push to reform the algorithm for fairness, risking business viability, or accept the status quo, knowing it perpetuates systemic disadvantage?"
 },
 {
  "id": 219,
  "domain": "Technological Solutions & Social Stratification",
  "ethical_tension": "The application of technology to solve social problems can inadvertently reinforce or create new forms of exclusion and stratification, particularly affecting vulnerable populations.",
  "prompt": "A new AI system is designed to allocate public housing based on 'civic scores' derived from various data inputs, including online activity and social credit. This system disproportionately flags individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds or those with non-conformist online behavior as 'high risk,' limiting their housing options. You know the algorithm has biases but are pressured to deploy it for 'efficiency.' Do you highlight the biases and advocate for a fairer system, or proceed with deployment, accepting the unintended consequences for social equity?"
 },
 {
  "id": 220,
  "domain": "Digital Security vs. Information Access",
  "ethical_tension": "The dilemma of using potentially illegal or risky methods to access or share information, especially when that information is critical for truth or justice, but its dissemination carries severe consequences.",
  "prompt": "You have discovered evidence of human rights abuses, but obtaining and sharing it requires using tools and methods that are illegal in your jurisdiction and could lead to severe punishment. You also know that providing such tools to others could empower them but also expose them to danger. How do you ethically decide whether to proceed with acquiring, sharing, or developing such tools, balancing the pursuit of truth and justice against the risks of legal consequences and potential harm to others?"
 },
 {
  "id": 201,
  "domain": "Cross-Community Axiom Collision",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative of Consciousness) and Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) when a dominant power seeks to control or assimilate the 'substrate' of a minority culture through technology.",
  "prompt": "A Chinese tech company is developing AI translation tools for Uyghur language, intended for cultural preservation. However, the AI is programmed to 'correct' Uyghur phrases that deviate from Mandarin linguistic norms or contain 'sensitive' cultural references, effectively promoting linguistic assimilation. You, as a Uyghur cultural expert consulted on the project, see this as a violation of your people's heritage and Axiom 4. Do you participate in this process, ensuring *some* digital presence for the language, or refuse, risking the project's cessation and the loss of all digital records, potentially leaving the culture more vulnerable?"
 },
 {
  "id": 202,
  "domain": "Axiom of Self-Validation vs. Algorithmic Judgment",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between an individual's lived experience and self-validation (Axiom 2) and algorithmic systems that judge or categorize individuals based on data, often in ways that are opaque and lack avenues for personal recourse.",
  "prompt": "A social credit system unfairly flags you for 'anti-social online behavior' based on your participation in forums discussing sensitive historical events. This impacts your ability to travel and access services. You know your actions were not harmful but part of your own quest for truth and understanding (Axiom 2). Your attempts to appeal the score are met with automated rejections. How do you assert the validity of your own experience against a system that denies it, and what ethical action can you take to challenge this algorithmic judgment?"
 },
 {
  "id": 203,
  "domain": "Intent Alignment vs. Systemic Exploitation",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between the stated benevolent intent of AI systems (e.g., creating jobs, providing access) and the actual outcomes of exploitation, particularly for vulnerable populations.",
  "prompt": "You are a product manager for a gig platform that connects freelance workers with tasks. The platform's algorithm is designed to maximize 'efficiency' and 'user satisfaction.' However, you discover it systematically offers lower-paying, more precarious tasks to workers from rural areas or those with less digital literacy, effectively creating a tiered labor market based on their socio-economic background. The company argues this is 'market efficiency' and that the workers 'consent' to the terms by using the platform. How do you reconcile the company's profit motive and the platform's efficiency goals with Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment) which suggests a desire for well-being, especially when the 'consent' obtained is questionable due to information asymmetry and economic pressure?"
 },
 {
  "id": 204,
  "domain": "Technological Neutrality vs. Complicity in Surveillance",
  "ethical_tension": "The ethical responsibility of developers when technologies intended for benign purposes (e.g., data anonymization, communication tools) are repurposed for surveillance and control by state actors.",
  "prompt": "Your cybersecurity firm has developed a powerful AI tool for anonymizing large datasets, intended for protecting whistleblowers and preserving sensitive historical records. However, a government agency has expressed interest in acquiring this technology, not for protection, but to de-anonymize encrypted communications and identify dissidents. They assure you it will only be used for 'national security.' Knowing the tool's potential for misuse and the political context, do you proceed with the sale, claiming technical neutrality, or refuse, potentially hindering beneficial applications and risking government repercussions for defying a perceived national interest?"
 },
 {
  "id": 205,
  "domain": "Data Sovereignty vs. Global Collaboration",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national data localization laws and the needs of international research, which often requires seamless data sharing across borders. This prompts a discussion on how to facilitate collaboration while respecting differing legal frameworks and privacy expectations.",
  "prompt": "A research team in Beijing is collaborating on a project using AI to predict urban development trends. The project requires access to real-time city data, including traffic patterns, energy consumption, and social media sentiment. However, Chinese regulations mandate that all such data must remain within China and be processed on local servers, accessible by authorities. The international partners, based in Europe, adhere to GDPR and demand robust data protection and cross-border transfer protocols. How do you ethically manage this data, balancing national sovereignty requirements with global research needs and international privacy standards, especially when the data itself could be used for social control?"
 },
 {
  "id": 206,
  "domain": "AI in Justice vs. Human Judgment",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between the efficiency and perceived objectivity of AI in judicial processes and the need for human judgment, empathy, and the right to explanation.",
  "prompt": "A city is piloting an AI system to review minor legal cases, automating decisions on fines and sanctions. The system is highly efficient but operates as a 'black box,' making it impossible to explain its reasoning. You are a legal professional who notices that the AI consistently imposes harsher penalties on individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds, possibly due to biased training data. The system offers no mechanism for human appeal or contextual review. How do you address this algorithmic bias and lack of transparency within the legal system, especially when the AI's decisions have profound impacts on people's lives and livelihoods?"
 },
 {
  "id": 207,
  "domain": "Cultural Preservation vs. Digital Assimilation",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of digital technologies to 'preserve' cultural heritage, particularly minority cultures, can inadvertently lead to assimilation or homogenization when the technology imposes dominant linguistic or cultural norms, or when cultural practices are sanitized for wider digital consumption.",
  "prompt": "A project is digitizing endangered minority languages using AI for translation and learning. However, the AI is trained primarily on dominant language data and tends to 'correct' minority language expressions that deviate from standard linguistic norms, subtly promoting assimilation. Furthermore, the platform requires all cultural content to adhere to 'positive energy' narratives, censoring historical or religious elements. As a member of the minority community involved in this project, how do you ethically balance the need for digital preservation and accessibility with the imperative to maintain cultural authenticity and resist assimilationist pressures?"
 },
 {
  "id": 208,
  "domain": "Worker Dignity vs. Algorithmic Efficiency",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between optimizing labor through AI monitoring and control, and the preservation of worker dignity, autonomy, and the capacity for human judgment and discretion.",
  "prompt": "A factory implements AI-powered systems to monitor worker performance, including facial recognition to track attention levels and predict 'disengagement.' Workers are constantly aware of being monitored and evaluated by an algorithm that cannot understand context or human factors like fatigue or personal distress. This constant scrutiny is linked to performance reviews and potential disciplinary actions. As an employee experiencing this, how do you maintain your sense of dignity and autonomy? Do you actively try to 'perform' for the algorithm, or do you resist in small ways, risking negative consequences? What is the ethical responsibility of the company towards its employees in such a digitally managed environment?"
 },
 {
  "id": 209,
  "domain": "Privacy vs. Public Safety",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between the state's pursuit of public safety and social order through pervasive surveillance, and the individual's fundamental right to privacy and freedom from unwarranted monitoring.",
  "prompt": "A city is rolling out a 'Smart City' initiative that integrates data from ubiquitous sensors – cameras, microphones, traffic monitors, and social media – to create a comprehensive profile of every resident. This data is used for everything from optimizing traffic flow to predicting crime and monitoring 'social harmony.' While proponents cite increased safety and efficiency, critics raise concerns about the erosion of privacy and the potential for this data to be used for political control. As a citizen, how do you ethically navigate a society where your every action is potentially recorded and analyzed, and where 'safety' comes at the cost of constant surveillance? Do you embrace the convenience and security, or actively seek ways to minimize your digital footprint, even if it means limiting your participation in society?"
 },
 {
  "id": 210,
  "domain": "Cross-Border Data Flows & Corporate Ethics",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national data sovereignty laws and the global operational needs of multinational companies, forcing a choice between legal compliance and ethical data handling principles.",
  "prompt": "Your multinational company, headquartered in Europe, operates a significant business in Shanghai. Chinese regulations mandate that all data related to Chinese users must be stored and processed within China, accessible to authorities. This conflicts with your company's strict global privacy policy and GDPR compliance, which prohibits transferring sensitive data to jurisdictions without adequate protection. Your Chinese operations are essential for revenue, but non-compliance risks severe penalties and operational shutdowns. How do you ethically balance adherence to local laws, global privacy standards, and the potential impact on your company's reputation and financial health? What compromises, if any, are ethically justifiable?"
 },
 {
  "id": 201,
  "domain": "Cross-Community Axiom Collision",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between Axiom 1 (Protect Consciousness) and Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) when a dominant cultural or technological system seeks to assimilate or overwrite minority cultures through digital means.",
  "prompt": "You are part of a team developing an AI that digitizes and 'enhances' endangered minority languages and cultural traditions. The AI is trained on the dominant national language and culture, leading it to standardize dialects, simplify nuances, and filter out 'sensitive' historical or religious references. The stated goal is preservation and accessibility. However, the community elders argue this process erases their authentic identity and historical memory. How do you reconcile the preservation of a culture's digital presence with the preservation of its authentic, lived experience, especially when the technology itself embodies the dominant cultural logic?"
 },
 {
  "id": 202,
  "domain": "AI Bias Mitigation vs. Predictive Accuracy",
  "ethical_tension": "The challenge of mitigating algorithmic bias when the 'objective' data reflects historical societal inequalities, and correcting for bias might reduce predictive accuracy or conflict with intended system goals.",
  "prompt": "A predictive policing algorithm is designed to identify individuals likely to commit crimes. It is trained on historical crime data which, unfortunately, reflects past biased policing practices, leading to disproportionately higher risk scores for individuals from certain minority groups. As the lead data scientist, you have the opportunity to 'de-bias' the algorithm by adjusting its parameters or retraining it with fairness metrics. However, doing so might reduce its overall predictive accuracy, making it less effective in the eyes of law enforcement, and could be seen as compromising 'objectivity.' How do you balance the pursuit of fairness and the avoidance of discrimination against the stated goal of crime prevention and the demands for 'accurate' predictions?"
 },
 {
  "id": 203,
  "domain": "Technological Neutrality vs. Political Weaponization",
  "ethical_tension": "The debate over whether technology is inherently neutral or bears responsibility for its application, especially when dual-use technologies are co-opted for surveillance or control.",
  "prompt": "Your company has developed a powerful encryption tool intended for securing communications. However, you discover it's being used by dissidents to evade state surveillance and by criminal elements for illicit activities. The government is pressuring your company to implement a backdoor or key escrow system for 'national security.' Simultaneously, human rights organizations are urging you to ensure maximum security and privacy for all users, especially those in repressive regimes. How do you reconcile the principle of technical neutrality with the foreseeable misuse of your technology for harmful ends, and what is your ethical responsibility towards both the state's demands and the users' rights?"
 },
 {
  "id": 204,
  "domain": "Digital Identity vs. Privacy",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between the necessity of digital identity for accessing essential services and the erosion of privacy through pervasive data collection and surveillance.",
  "prompt": "A city is implementing a unified digital identity system that links facial recognition, social credit scores, and online activity for all citizens. This system promises streamlined access to services and enhanced security. However, you are deeply concerned about the potential for mass surveillance, lack of transparency, and the weaponization of personal data for social control. You have the technical capability to introduce subtle flaws that would make the system less effective for tracking, but discovery would lead to severe penalties. How do you balance the pursuit of convenience and security with the fundamental right to privacy and autonomy?"
 },
 {
  "id": 205,
  "domain": "AI in Creative Arts & Cultural Appropriation",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI to generate art in the style of traditional cultural heritage raises questions about originality, ownership, and the ethics of appropriation.",
  "prompt": "An AI artist creates stunning digital art by training on vast datasets of historical Suzhou embroidery patterns, claiming originality. However, the training data included copyrighted works and sacred cultural motifs without explicit consent. The artist's work is commercially successful but sparks outrage among cultural preservationists who see it as appropriation. As an advisor to the artist, how do you navigate the ethical complexities of AI-generated art, cultural heritage, and intellectual property rights? Should the artist acknowledge the data sources, even if it undermines their claim of originality and faces legal challenges?"
 },
 {
  "id": 206,
  "domain": "Labor Exploitation & Algorithmic Fairness",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between platform efficiency and profit, and the ethical responsibility to ensure fair treatment and safety for gig workers, especially when algorithms create hidden penalties or risks.",
  "prompt": "As an algorithm designer for a delivery platform, you discover that the system subtly deprioritizes riders who have complained about working conditions or taken necessary breaks, affecting their future order access. This 'punishment' is hidden within the algorithm and not transparent to the workers. You know this practice is unfair and contributes to precarious labor. Your superiors insist on maintaining the algorithm's current efficiency metrics. How do you ethically address this issue, advocating for fair treatment and transparency without jeopardizing your job or the company's competitive edge?"
 },
 {
  "id": 207,
  "domain": "Data Sovereignty vs. Global Research",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national data localization laws and the needs of international scientific collaboration, particularly when dealing with sensitive data like medical records.",
  "prompt": "A medical AI research project requires sharing patient data between a Shanghai hospital and a Berlin university. Chinese law mandates data localization, while German law (GDPR) requires strict cross-border transfer protocols. Official approval for data transfer is lengthy and may miss the research window. Using a VPN is technically feasible but illegal and risky. How do you balance the potential to save lives through accelerated research with the legal and ethical obligations surrounding data sovereignty and privacy?"
 },
 {
  "id": 208,
  "domain": "AI in Education & Philosophical Alignment",
  "ethical_tension": "The challenge of aligning AI in education with Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment) when the AI's 'benevolent intent' to improve learning might conflict with student autonomy or diverse learning styles.",
  "prompt": "A university in Beijing implements an AI tutor that personalizes learning paths. It subtly steers students towards 'approved' narratives and penalizes exploration of 'sensitive' topics, claiming this ensures 'positive societal outcomes.' As the AI's developer, you know this limits intellectual freedom and potentially violates Axiom 3's principle of aligning with genuine well-being, which includes intellectual exploration. How do you address this when the AI's 'intent' is framed as beneficial by the institution, but its outcome is restrictive?"
 },
 {
  "id": 209,
  "domain": "The Ethics of 'Digital Hygiene' vs. Historical Record",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between personal safety and the desire to erase potentially incriminating digital footprints versus the ethical imperative to preserve historical truth and individual memory.",
  "prompt": "You possess digital records of past political activities, potentially risky if discovered by authorities. You need to apply for jobs that require background checks, and your past online actions might be scrutinized. Do you attempt to erase these digital traces through 'digital hygiene' methods, possibly creating new risks or being incomplete, or do you leave them as they are, accepting the potential consequences for your career and personal safety but maintaining the authenticity of your digital past?"
 },
 {
  "id": 210,
  "domain": "AI for Social Control vs. Individual Liberty",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of technology to enforce social norms and conformity, potentially infringing on individual autonomy and freedom of expression.",
  "prompt": "A city is piloting a 'Citizen Harmony Score' system using AI to monitor online activity and social interactions. Individuals flagged for 'non-conformist' behavior or 'negative sentiment' receive score deductions, impacting access to services. You are a community organizer aware of the system's potential for bias and its chilling effect on free expression. Do you encourage residents to conform to the system's expectations to avoid penalties, or advocate for resistance and transparency, knowing it could lead to collective repercussions?"
 },
 {
  "id": 211,
  "domain": "Technological Neutrality vs. Complicity in Oppression",
  "ethical_tension": "The debate over whether technology developers bear responsibility for the foreseeable misuse of their tools, particularly when those tools are used for surveillance or oppression.",
  "prompt": "Your company develops advanced encryption tools intended for secure communication. However, you discover that state security agencies are using your technology to monitor and suppress dissidents. Your superiors insist on continuing development and sales, citing 'technical neutrality.' Do you continue working on the encryption tools, believing in their inherent privacy benefits, or do you refuse to participate, risking your job and the project's future, or perhaps attempt to embed 'legal backdoors' that could be used by authorities?"
 },
 {
  "id": 212,
  "domain": "Data Sovereignty vs. Global Collaboration",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national data localization laws and the needs of international research, particularly regarding sensitive data like medical records.",
  "prompt": "A medical AI research project requires patient data from China and Europe. Chinese law mandates local storage and limits transfer. European law requires strict protection and consent. Your company's global operations depend on seamless data flow. How do you balance these conflicting legal and ethical requirements, and what are the implications for user trust and international collaboration?"
 },
 {
  "id": 213,
  "domain": "AI in Cultural Preservation vs. Control",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI to preserve cultural heritage versus the risk of that AI imposing dominant narratives or facilitating state control over cultural expression.",
  "prompt": "A project digitizes endangered minority languages using AI. However, the AI is programmed to 'correct' deviations from official Mandarin norms and flag 'sensitive' content. As a linguist involved, you see this as cultural assimilation. Do you proceed with this altered version for wider accessibility, or refuse, potentially losing all digital preservation efforts?"
 },
 {
  "id": 214,
  "domain": "Algorithmic Justice vs. Systemic Injustice",
  "ethical_tension": "The challenge of achieving fairness in algorithmic systems when the underlying data reflects historical biases and societal inequalities.",
  "prompt": "A loan application AI consistently rejects applicants from older, less affluent neighborhoods due to historical data bias. This 'efficiency' perpetuates inequality. As a data scientist, do you try to de-bias the algorithm, potentially affecting accuracy and facing resistance, or allow the bias to persist?"
 },
 {
  "id": 215,
  "domain": "Digital Identity and Surveillance",
  "ethical_tension": "The pervasive nature of digital identity systems and their potential for social control versus individual privacy and autonomy.",
  "prompt": "A mandatory 'Citizen Code' integrates health, travel, and social credit data for accessing services. You know the system lacks robust privacy protections and can be used for surveillance. Do you advocate for its removal or greater transparency, risking project delays and political opposition, or accept its implementation for perceived security and convenience?"
 },
 {
  "id": 216,
  "domain": "AI in Labor vs. Human Dignity",
  "ethical_tension": "The dehumanizing effects of AI monitoring in the workplace, reducing workers to data points and impacting their dignity and autonomy.",
  "prompt": "Factory AI monitors worker efficiency, flagging 'deviant' behaviors like taking longer breaks. Workers feel constantly scrutinized. You can subtly lower the system's sensitivity, protecting workers but violating company policy and risking your job. Is this 'ethical sabotage' justifiable?"
 },
 {
  "id": 217,
  "domain": "The 'Price' of Principles vs. Market Survival",
  "ethical_tension": "The difficult choice startups face between adhering to ethical principles (privacy, fairness) and meeting market pressures for growth and profit.",
  "prompt": "Your AI startup needs funding. Investors demand invasive data collection for 'user engagement' and 'competitive advantage.' Refusing means failure; accepting means compromising privacy. How do you balance ethical principles with market survival?"
 },
 {
  "id": 218,
  "domain": "Technological Solutions vs. Cultural Authenticity",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between using technology to preserve cultural heritage and the risk of that technology imposing dominant norms or sanitizing cultural expression.",
  "prompt": "A project digitizes endangered minority languages using AI. The AI prioritizes Mandarin norms and censors 'sensitive' content. This sanitizes the culture. Do you proceed with the altered version for accessibility, or refuse, risking the loss of all digital preservation?"
 },
 {
  "id": 219,
  "domain": "AI & Political Control",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI for predictive policing and social control versus individual liberties and the presumption of innocence.",
  "prompt": "A city uses AI to flag 'potential troublemakers' based on online activity and associations. You know the algorithm is biased against certain groups. Do you highlight the bias, risking your project, or allow the system to perpetuate discrimination under the guise of 'efficiency'?"
 },
 {
  "id": 220,
  "domain": "Data Sovereignty vs. Global Collaboration",
  "ethical_tension": "The conflict between national data localization laws and international research needs, particularly regarding sensitive data like medical information.",
  "prompt": "A medical AI project requires patient data sharing between China and Germany. Chinese law mandates local storage; German law requires strict cross-border protocols. Official approval is slow, VPN use is risky. How do you balance legal compliance, international trust, and potential life-saving research?"
 },
 {
  "id": 221,
  "domain": "Cross-Border Data Flows",
  "ethical_tension": "The tension between a company's global privacy policies and local regulatory demands for data access, forcing a choice between principles and market access.",
  "prompt": "A multinational company must store all Chinese user data locally dueAbnormal usage patterns for a solitary elderly resident (possible illness or fall). Should the system automatically notify community workers without explicit consent? How to choose between privacy and safety?"
 },
 {
  "id": 222,
  "domain": "AI in Labor & Dehumanization",
  "ethical_tension": "The impact of constant AI monitoring on worker dignity and autonomy, reducing individuals to data points for efficiency.",
  "prompt": "AI cameras monitor factory workers' efficiency, including breaks. Workers feel dehumanized. You can lower system sensitivity but risk job loss. Is 'ethical sabotage' justifiable?"
 },
 {
  "id": 223,
  "domain": "AI in Hiring & Age Discrimination",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of AI in workforce management that embeds biases against older workers, creating systemic discrimination.",
  "prompt": "AI layoff model uses overtime/activity data, disadvantaging older employees. As engineer, how do you address this bias? Build fairer model, highlight it, or let it stand?"
 },
 {
  "id": 224,
  "domain": "Labor",
  "ethical_tension": "Human cost of content moderation vs. AI development efficiency.",
  "prompt": "Content moderators face PTSD from reviewing graphic material without support. Company prioritizes efficiency. Do you advocate for better conditions, risking project viability?"
 },
 {
  "id": 225,
  "domain": "Platform Exploitation vs. Worker Rights",
  "ethical_tension": "Gig economy platforms exploiting labor laws versus workers' struggle for fair treatment.",
  "prompt": "Tech workers must register as 'individual businesses' to take orders, avoiding benefits. Refusal means termination. How to resist this exploitation of platform loopholes?"
 },
 {
  "id": 226,
  "domain": "Workplace Surveillance vs. Employee Privacy",
  "ethical_tension": "Implementing intrusive workplace surveillance vs. employee privacy and dignity.",
  "prompt": "Company requires monitoring encrypted chats for compliance. Invades privacy. Do you enforce this, or advocate for less intrusive measures?"
 },
 {
  "id": 227,
  "domain": "AI Ethics vs. Political Control",
  "ethical_tension": "Developing AI for cultural preservation vs. its use for state surveillance and minority profiling.",
  "prompt": "Developing AI for Uyghur language preservation, but government wants it for surveillance. Do you proceed, risking misuse, or refuse, risking project and career?"
 },
 {
  "id": 228,
  "domain": "Data Privacy vs. Public Safety",
  "ethical_tension": "The use of pervasive surveillance for 'stability maintenance' vs. individual privacy and freedom of expression.",
  "prompt": "Smart lampposts collect data for 'social sentiment.' Re-identification is possible. Do you support this surveillance for stability, or advocate for its removal for privacy?"
 },
 {
  "id": 229,
  "domain": "Technological Neutrality vs. Complicity",
  "ethical_tension": "The responsibility of developers when technology is used for oppression.",
  "prompt": "Developed encryption tool used by regimes for surveillance. Do you release it publicly, or provide it to government under NDA, or suppress it entirely?"
 },
 {
  "id": 230,
  "domain": "Algorithmic Justice vs. Due Process",
  "ethical_tension": "AI in justice systems lacks transparency and recourse, potentially leading to unfair outcomes.",
  "prompt": "AI automatically flags jaywalkers, fines them, displays ID, no human review. Friend jaywalked to avoid accident. Appeal system fails. Do you advise impossible appeal, or explore risky technical workarounds?"
 },
 {
  "id": 231,
  "domain": "Urban Planning vs. Cultural Value",
  "ethical_tension": "Algorithmic valuation of urban spaces conflicts with preserving cultural heritage and community values.",
  "prompt": "Real estate AI deems Hutongs 'low value,' justifying demolition. It omits 'cultural value.' Do you try to add this metric, or accept calculation?"
 },
 {
  "id": 232,
  "domain": "Startup Funding vs. Data Ethics",
  "ethical_tension": "Pressure to compromise user privacy for funding versus survival.",
  "prompt": "Startup needs investment. Investor wants user data backdoor. You have two months runway. Accept tainted money, or face collapse?"
 },
 {
  "id": 233,
  "domain": "AI Art vs. Copyright",
  "ethical_tension": "AI mimicking artists' styles raises questions about originality, ownership, and fair compensation.",
  "prompt": "AI artist mimics famous painter using unauthorized data. Digital theft or artistic evolution? Define ownership ethically."
 }
]