MEPs call for European AI rules to ban biometric surveillance in public
yahoo.com
yahoo.com
That said, number of cameras is not the only metric. Every house and business having their own camera backed by VHS tapes and watched occasionally by bored humans is much less of an issue than one camera per road but they’re all networked and backed by hard drives and scanned by AI.
Of course you are speaking in the legal sense, but the target of these laws are US companies/companies where decisions are made in the US.
What would Hitler have done with it?
This is why in Germany there were protests against recording peoples religion during the census.
All of these surveillance tools are based on the notion that the people who use them are the good guys. But there is no guarantee that they are now and will forever be.
Indeed, and Hitler did use census to identify Jews to kill, thanks to the sabotaging actions of René Carmille, tens of thousands of lives were saved (although Carmille himself survived torture, he died in January 45)
The first ethical hacker doesn't get enough exposure IMO.
"He also hacked his own machines, reprogramming them so that they’d never punch information from Column 11 [which indicated religion] onto any census card"
That's a very simplistic test that falls flat on its face when you realise Hitler loved animals, was a vegetarian, and despised smoking and alcohol. By your test, animal cruelty and self-poisoning are fine because Hitler disproved of them?
AIUI it's not "what would Hitler think" but "what would Hitler do given the opportunity". As in, Hitler couldn't use self-poisoning to further his goals, but he could use mass surveillance.
Let me rephrase my statement and then check if people are still that triggered by it:
Whenever you grant your government power, think about how this power could be abused if the government changes and your favouvered party is not in charge anymore.
What would Hitler do with space ships? Colonize the Moon, I guess.
> This is why in Germany there were protests against recording peoples religion during the census.
You already do that for tax purposes, right?
It is done for tax purposes, yes, and it probably shouldn't be.
But I don't think the government needs a list of all people with a certain religion. Could be abused.
In the end, the only reason we have this is that the church and the state are to close. Religion is private. If you are a member of a church, you pay your membership fee to the church. No need for the government to be involved. It's nothing I would start a revolution about, but slowly change the system and make it better.
On the other hand the real issue I see is that while the EU will put the breaks on its own development of the tech, the US and China will accelerate it. Sooner or later the EU will likely drop the position when the stakes are high enough and it suits "someone", and just back channel to obtain access to it. Which is possibly the worst position to be in.
Personally I think this AI stuff is pretty neat, but society must have a larger conversation around the existing power structures before we just let the most well capitalized business entities and their business owners (again, some of the wealthiest figures in recorded history) utilize these tools through which capital will become further concentrated just because some of their employees have a PhD and make 350k and now are able to just spend all their time developing technologies with clear non-linear payoffs, enriching some at the explicit expense of others at a structurally different rate than previous technological innovations.
What does everyone think of Palantir? Do they have much of a foothold in Europe? I imagine not since they are direct contractors to the US government, but I mean they are again doing massive data analytics on the human population in ways that are almost as sketchy as Facebook, but with worse implications because of the direct interfacing with the military-industrial complex.
But why not? Long as we're talking about 'reality annihilation' technology, maybe the researches stumble upon unknown truths about reality. Perhaps they also touch upon 'reality creating' technology, giving them infinite cups of Earl Gray tea.
As long as someone is going to use AI to create immense wealth for themselves, and potentially destructive weapons, as a European, I think we'd be fools not to try and at least understand the developments, the risks, and have contingency plans (think Batman) for dealing with what might come out of it. Things we can't do without our own research and know how.
That's a false conclusion, I'm not suggesting they should develop their own, just that they will be in a the position where others have it and the EU will be knocking at their doors to get access. Whether it will be for legitimate interest or not is another topic.
Its like watching huricanes, you can have thousands of sensors, radar, satelites etc and have no clue which way its going to move tomorrow morning. And no one is even day dreaming about what needs to happen before the chimp troupe with 6 inch brains can control the path of a huricane.
So while these data oriented firms be it Palantir, FB, Netflix all happily trumpet capabilities of prediction and control there is lot of proof they are coasting on hot air.