cross posting:
Posted by mojo
(here)
Have you ever thought that we might be monitored by other agencies or maybe our names are on a list?
They can monitor almost everything and know already who you are
before you became a member ... I talked to the
inventor of a very sophisticated search engine in The Netherlands "crawling/data mining" the net 24/7 since mid 1990s onward (before Google existed!), and he is a multimillionaire too also like me born in 1966 and visited my suppressed news/conspiracy research lectures in the mid 1990s.
He became my friend and said there are ways to
bypass "limitations" to harvest (data mining) much more data from certain sites than what was "allowed" ... He demonstrated that how he did that with my sites having firewalls/"secured areas" etc. etc. At the time, I had my own server, creating multiple conspiracy sites.
He told me much more how they can collect data on a massive scale and when stored even the Dutch intelligence agencies requested him to share certain data of the mid 1990s, but he refused!
Most people who found a way to "100% secure data" are more likely to be targeted as
"possible dangerous" ... than anyone who is a transparent being a government & MSM critic.
So if you want to be targeted, just be paranoid enough to make everything "super secure" thinking you can be "at rest" that way .... lol
- It is a "Catch 22 situation", you think you are "damned" if you do ... but also if you don't.
My take on it is that is: The more transparent you are, the better you are protected, and you may even have an impact on
some insiders who are (or will be) on (y)our side!
Nowadays, they do not need humans to do the mass surveillance intelligence work because next generation super advanced "
A.I. assistants" tools that are
beyond what we see in the public domain like:
ChatGPT &
GROQ
cheers,
John 🦜🦋🌳
--o-O-o--
PDF "Mass Surveillance & Artificial Intelligence" (15 Pages):
Throughout spring 2024, European Union (EU) lawmakers have been taking the
final procedural steps to pass a largely disappointing new law, the EU Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) Act.
This law is expected to come into force in the summer, with one of the most hotly-contested parts of the law – the bans on unacceptably harmful uses of A.I. – slated to apply from the end of 2024 (six months and 20 days after the legal text is officially published).
The first draft of this Act, in 2021, proposed to ban some forms of public facial recognition, showing that
lawmakers were already listening to the demands of our Reclaim Your Face campaign. Since then, the A.I. Act has continued to be a focus point for our fight to stop people being treated as walking barcodes in public spaces.
But after a gruelling three-year process,
A.I. Act negotiations are coming to an underwhelming end, with numerous
missed opportunities to protect people’s rights and freedoms or to
uphold civic space.
One of the biggest problems we see is that the
bans on different forms of biometric mass surveillance, or BMS, are full of holes. BMS is the term we’ve used as an umbrella for different methods of using people’s biometric data to surveil them in an untargeted or arbitrarily-targeted way – which have no place in a democratic society.
At the same time, all is not lost. As we get into the nitty-gritty of the final text, and reflect on the years of hard work, we mourn the existence of the dark clouds – and we
celebrate the silver linings and the opportunities they create to better protect people’s sensitive biometric data.
- "Legitimising" Biometric (A.I. Powered) Mass Surveillance Agenda:
Whilst the
A.I. Act is supposed to ban a lot of unacceptable biometric practices, we’ve argued since the beginning that it could instead
become a blueprint for how to conduct BMS.
As we predicted, the final Act takes a potentially dystopian step towards
legalising live public facial recognition – which so far has never been explicitly allowed in any EU country. The same goes for
pseudo-scientific AI ‘mind-reading’ systems, which the A.I. Act shockingly allows states to use in policing and border contexts. Using machines to categorise people’s gender and other sensitive characteristics, based on how they look, is also allowed in several contexts.
We have long argued that
these practices can never be compatible with our fundamental rights to dignity, privacy, data protection, free expression and non-discrimination. By allowing them in a range of contexts, the A.I. Act legitimises these horrifying practices.
Yet whilst the law falls far short of the full ban on biometric mass surveillance in public spaces that we called for, it nevertheless
offers several points to continue our fight in the future. To give one example, we have the powerful opportunity to capitalise on the wide political will in support of our ongoing work against BMS to
make sure that the A.I. Act’s loopholes don’t make it into national laws in EU member states.
Our
upcoming ‘Legal and practical guide to fighting BMS after the A.I. Act’ is therefore intended to inform and equip those who are reflecting and re-fuelling for the next stage in the fight against BMS.
This guide will
lay out where we can use the A.I. Act’s opportunities to fight for better protections for our rights to exist free from BMS in public spaces. This includes charting out more than 10 specific advocacy opportunities including formal and informal spaces to influence, and highlighting the parts of the legal text that create space for our advocacy efforts.
- A precedent for banning dangerous A.I.
We also remind ourselves that whilst the biometrics bans have been dangerously watered down, the Act nevertheless accepts that
we must ban A.I. systems that are not compatible with a democratic society. This idea has been a vital concept for those of us working to protect human rights in the age of A.I., and we faced a lot of opposition on this point from industry and conservative lawmakers.
This legal and normative acceptance of the need for
A.I. bans has the potential to set an important
global precedent for putting the rights and freedoms of people and communities ahead of the private interests of the lucrative security and surveillance tech industry. The industry wants all technologies and practices to be on the table – but the
A.I. Act shows that this is not the EU’s way.
- above response came originally from here.
Re: A.I. is Progressing Faster Than You Think!
Reply With Quote
Re: A.I. is Progressing Faster Than You Think!
Bookmarks