Europe eyes strict rules for artificial intelligence

Zeedox

Resident Canadian
Dec 1, 2020
2,709
3,046
113
Canada's Ocean Playground

Non-compliant companies could face a fine of up to €20 million or 4 percent of turnover.


Social scoring systems, such as those launched in China that track the trustworthiness of people and businesses, are classified as "contravening the Union values" and are going to be banned.

The proposal also wants to prohibit AI systems that cause harm to people by manipulating their behavior, opinions or decisions; exploit or target people's vulnerabilities; and for mass surveillance.

But the rules carve out an exception allowing authorities to use the tech if they're fighting serious crime. The use of facial recognition technology in public places, for example, could be allowed if its use is limited in time and geography. The Commission said it would allow for exceptional cases in which law enforcement officers could use facial recognition technology from CCTV cameras to find terrorists, for example.

The exception is likely designed to appease countries like France, which is keen to integrate AI into its security apparatus, but is opposed by privacy hawks and digital rights activists who have lobbied hard for these uses to be banned outright.
 

Gomez Adams

Grammar Fascist
Staff member
Dec 1, 2020
3,958
2,937
113
Suwanee, Georgia
exposingwot.com
This part:

The proposal also wants to prohibit AI systems that cause harm to people by manipulating their behavior, opinions or decisions; exploit or target people's vulnerabilities; and for mass surveillance.​

Would put Google, Facebook, Twitter, and pretty much every other search engine and social media site, out of business instantly. That's exactly what they all do: manipulate your results to show you what they want you to see based on your habits.

And this one:

The use of facial recognition technology in public places, for example, could be allowed if its use is limited in time and geography. The Commission said it would allow for exceptional cases in which law enforcement officers could use facial recognition technology from CCTV cameras to find terrorists, for example.​

I've never understood the opposition to. It's not "spying" on you if you're doing nothing wrong. What it is though is a tool to find you should you be abducted or find your attacker should you be attacked. They would know the faces of the last people you were near and be able to question them.

What's more, if you have dementia or something like that and you go missing, they could easily take a family photo of you, put it in the system and find the last places you were seen and search there immediately rather than having no idea where to even begin.

I can't think of a downside for the widespread use of facial recognition for anybody except for people intent on or already breaking the law.
 

Zeedox

Resident Canadian
Dec 1, 2020
2,709
3,046
113
Canada's Ocean Playground
And this one:

The use of facial recognition technology in public places, for example, could be allowed if its use is limited in time and geography. The Commission said it would allow for exceptional cases in which law enforcement officers could use facial recognition technology from CCTV cameras to find terrorists, for example.​

I've never understood the opposition to. It's not "spying" on you if you're doing nothing wrong.

I find this a poor argument. Many people have personal information they may not want publicized nor should it be. They could be attending therapy, receiving medical treatment for an undisclosed ailment, visiting an AIDS clinic, helping the homeless. Activities that are, quite frankly, their own business and nobody else. Unfortunately this proposal does nothing to stop what your arguing for (see below).


What it is though is a tool to find you should you be abducted or find your attacker should you be attacked. They would know the faces of the last people you were near and be able to question them.

What's more, if you have dementia or something like that and you go missing, they could easily take a family photo of you, put it in the system and find the last places you were seen and search there immediately rather than having no idea where to even begin.

I believe you've misunderstood the article. This is exactly what they mean by "limited to time and geography". They'll (government) be recording everything and would be able to review it and use the information available as authorized. In the event of a real time situation they would be allowed access. There's nothing in this stopping the recording, it's just limiting it's access to real-time use as authorized by the event unfolding.
What it should avoid is those creepy British cams watching for littering and then using a bullhorn to point it out and threaten arrest al la big brother. Or a corporation using its own facial recognition to track you from their own store to store. I don't want the bus shelter advertising changing to suddenly reflect what local businesses my eyes have scanned in the surrounding area from local net facial recognition.

I can't think of a downside for the widespread use of facial recognition for anybody except for people intent on or already breaking the law.

See point 1. This is akin to saying atheists will not be moral because they have no religion. I value my privacy and will do everything I can to protect it and that includes limiting the governments and corporations real-time unnecessary use of technology.
 

Gomez Adams

Grammar Fascist
Staff member
Dec 1, 2020
3,958
2,937
113
Suwanee, Georgia
exposingwot.com
The government by law can't reveal any medical information without your written consent, so the whole therapy, medical concern is irrelevant as it doesn't exist.

What's more, people are already tracked the same way by every internet entity there is on their digital devices and they seem to have no problem with it.

If the government wants to sit around watching me be indecisive for 20 minutes at Home Depot, they're welcome to do so.

I can't think of anything I do that I would care about them seeing.

So why anyone else would get upset over is beyond me; unless of course they have something to hide.
 

Gomez Adams

Grammar Fascist
Staff member
Dec 1, 2020
3,958
2,937
113
Suwanee, Georgia
exposingwot.com
Think that if you wish.

This is just like the Patriot Act, where the NSA was allowed to capture all phone calls and review them. People cried and moaned and groaned about "muh privacy" and "muh rights".

Nothing happened unless you had something to hide. The NSA didn't care about your affair with an office associate. The NSA didn't care about you bringing two joints to the cook out. The NSA didn't care that you were thinking about cheating on your taxes.

The only thing the NSA cared about was you making a bomb, planning a shooting, organizing an attack. And that to this day is all they ever used it for.

AI facial recognition is no different. The police don't care if you're going to the doctor. The police don't care if you're seeing a shrink for your PTSD. The police don't care if you're sneaking out of work early to have an affair on your way home.

The police do care if you just robbed a bank. The police do care if you're reported missing. The police do care if you just beat up an old Asian lady and took off running.

It's a lot of crying over nothing in the exact same way crying over the Patriot Act was.
 

Hugo Stiglitz

Resident Vigilante
Dec 7, 2020
1,239
1,351
113
So why anyone else would get upset over is beyond me; unless of course they have something to hide.
That's always the way it starts out isn't it? It's for your safety. It's for the greater good.

Yeah. My fucking ass. How do you think we got police with tanks and kevlar and fucking machine guns? It's for your protection. On the news every fucking day I have to hear people say shit like 'to keep you safe' and 'for your protection'. Next thing you know you wake up one day and everything you thought was there to help you is there to control you.

I know. It sounds like a fucking right winger that dug a bunker in his back yard but man that is the shit that got us where we are. Police are out of fucking control as it is with almost total impunity and now your OK with giving them autonomy to record your shit 24/7 anywhere you go? And then theres the case of that guy that was identified wrong by that same shit.


There's about a million and one fuck ups that can happen with all that shit as it is. To allow it to go unchecked? You're fucking insane man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zeedox

Zeedox

Resident Canadian
Dec 1, 2020
2,709
3,046
113
Canada's Ocean Playground
Think that if you wish.

This is just like the Patriot Act, where the NSA was allowed to capture all phone calls and review them. People cried and moaned and groaned about "muh privacy" and "muh rights".

Nothing happened unless you had something to hide. The NSA didn't care about your affair with an office associate. The NSA didn't care about you bringing two joints to the cook out. The NSA didn't care that you were thinking about cheating on your taxes.

The only thing the NSA cared about was you making a bomb, planning a shooting, organizing an attack. And that to this day is all they ever used it for.

AI facial recognition is no different. The police don't care if you're going to the doctor. The police don't care if you're seeing a shrink for your PTSD. The police don't care if you're sneaking out of work early to have an affair on your way home.

The police do care if you just robbed a bank. The police do care if you're reported missing. The police do care if you just beat up an old Asian lady and took off running.

It's a lot of crying over nothing in the exact same way crying over the Patriot Act was.

Which has never resulted in an arrest as far as I know...
 

Zeedox

Resident Canadian
Dec 1, 2020
2,709
3,046
113
Canada's Ocean Playground
That's always the way it starts out isn't it? It's for your safety. It's for the greater good.

Yeah. My fucking ass. How do you think we got police with tanks and kevlar and fucking machine guns? It's for your protection. On the news every fucking day I have to hear people say shit like 'to keep you safe' and 'for your protection'. Next thing you know you wake up one day and everything you thought was there to help you is there to control you.

I know. It sounds like a fucking right winger that dug a bunker in his back yard but man that is the shit that got us where we are. Police are out of fucking control as it is with almost total impunity and now your OK with giving them autonomy to record your shit 24/7 anywhere you go? And then theres the case of that guy that was identified wrong by that same shit.


There's about a million and one fuck ups that can happen with all that shit as it is. To allow it to go unchecked? You're fucking insane man.

Exactly. This is how it starts. Later it becomes guilty until proven innocent.
 

Zeedox

Resident Canadian
Dec 1, 2020
2,709
3,046
113
Canada's Ocean Playground
It's also expired afaik. Trump's threat to veto it's extension caused the House of Representatives to issue an indefinite postponement of the vote to pass the Senate version of the bill.
I haven't heard anyone mention it since.