#masssurveillance

[azspot]

The latest, deluxe end point of these time and attendance tchotchkes and apps is something like Austin-headquartered HID’s OmniKey platform. Designed for factories, hospitals, universities, and offices, this is essentially an all-encompassing RFID log-in and security system for employees, via smart cards, smartphone wallets, and wearables. These will not only monitor turnstile entrances, exits, and floor access by way of elevators but also parking, the use of meeting rooms, the cafeteria, printers, lockers, and yes, vending machine access.

These technologies, and more sophisticated worker location- and behavior-tracking systems, are expanding from blue-collar jobs to pink-collar industries and even white-collar office settings. Depending on the survey, approximately 70 to 80 percent of large US employers now use some form of employee monitoring, and the likes of PwC have explicitly told workers that managers will be tracking their location to enforce a three-day office week policy.

“Several of these earlier technologies, like RFID sensors and low-tech barcode scanners, have been used in manufacturing, in warehouses, or in other settings for some time,” says Wolfie Christl, a researcher of workplace surveillance for Cracked Labs, a nonprofit based in Vienna, Austria. “We’re moving toward the use of all kinds of sensor data, and this kind of technology is certainly now moving into the offices. However, I think for many of these, it’s questionable whether they really make sense there.”

What’s new, at least to the recent pandemic age of hybrid working, is the extent to which workers can now be tracked inside office buildings. Cracked Labs published a frankly terrifying 25-page case study report in November 2024 showing how systems of wireless networking, motion sensors, and Bluetooth beacons, whether intentionally or as a byproduct of their capabilities, can provide “behavioral monitoring and profiling” in office settings.

[tmarshconnors]

"It's quite simple, Senator: if you're more upset at the whistleblower than you are at the lawbreaking they revealed, you're not in a position to be questioning anybody's judgment."

Edward Joseph Snowden is an American-Russian former NSA intelligence contractor and whistleblower who leaked classified documents revealing the existence of global surveillance programs.

Whistleblower on Mass Surveillance – Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, leaked classified information in 2013, exposing global surveillance programs operated by the U.S. government in collaboration with international allies.

Former Intelligence Operative – Before becoming a whistleblower, Snowden worked for the CIA and later as a contractor for the NSA, where he gained access to classified materials.

Asylum in Russia – After leaking the documents, Snowden fled to Hong Kong and later sought asylum in Russia, where he has lived since 2013. He was granted permanent residency and eventually Russian citizenship in 2022.

Public Debate on Privacy and Security – Snowden’s revelations sparked widespread debate on government surveillance, privacy rights, and national security, leading to some reforms in intelligence practices, particularly the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015.

Author and Speaker – He wrote a memoir, Permanent Record (2019), detailing his experiences and views on privacy and government overreach. He also continues to advocate for digital privacy and government transparency.

[ptitolier]

AI Surveillance in Europe

Exceptions to a general ban

The European Union and AI Surveillance: A Step Forward or a Step into Dystopia?

📅 Based on the article from Journal Mapa, January 24, 2025, by Théophile Fagundes.

Introduction: A New Era of AI Surveillance in Europe

On February 2, 2025, a new European law on artificial intelligence will come into effect, bringing major changes to how law enforcement uses AI-powered surveillance. While the EU had initially positioned itself as a global leader in ethical AI regulation, this latest move raises significant concerns about mass surveillance, civil liberties, and the power of private tech firms in shaping law enforcement.

At the heart of this legislation is a contradiction: the EU officially bans biometric identification and emotion recognition in public spaces but has introduced several key exceptions under pressure from France and its European allies, including Italy, Hungary, and Portugal. These exceptions open the door to real-time facial recognition, predictive policing, and increased corporate involvement in surveillance technology, triggering debates about whether Europe is drifting toward an Orwellian model of governance.

What Does the New Law Change?

Facial Recognition and Protest Surveillance

One of the most controversial aspects of the law is the use of real-time facial recognition technology in public spaces. While EU lawmakers claim this will only be used for investigating serious crimes, activists, journalists, and civil rights organizations argue that it will disproportionately target political activists, climate protesters, and marginalized communities.

In recent years, countries like France and Hungary have pushed for broader surveillance powers, justifying them through concerns over terrorism and public order. The new AI law will allow law enforcement to monitor large gatherings, including protests and demonstrations, under the pretext of "national security."

Predictive Policing: Science or Speculation?

The law also legitimizes the use of predictive policing, a controversial technology that uses AI to analyze past crime data and predict where future crimes might occur. While its proponents argue that it enhances efficiency and crime prevention, critics point to serious biases in these algorithms, which often result in racial profiling and over-policing of specific communities.

Predictive policing has been tested in several European cities, often with mixed results. Studies have shown that these AI models tend to reinforce existing biases in law enforcement rather than provide truly objective predictions. As a result, many experts fear that instead of reducing crime, predictive AI may actually contribute to systemic discrimination.

The Growing Role of Private Companies

Another key issue is the increasing involvement of private technology firms in law enforcement. Under the new law, European governments can outsource AI surveillance technologies to private corporations, raising concerns about data privacy, lack of transparency, and profit-driven motives.

Tech giants and AI startups have lobbied heavily for these provisions, seeing a lucrative market in supplying governments with surveillance tools. However, this raises a fundamental question: should law enforcement responsibilities be handed over to private companies that are not directly accountable to the public?

A Threat to Civil Liberties?

According to Investigate Europe, this new law does not strengthen protections for citizens—instead, it expands the reach of state surveillance.

Critics warn that these measures blur the line between public safety and authoritarian control. Who decides what constitutes a "threat" to national security? Who ensures that AI-powered surveillance is not misused for political repression?

The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has repeatedly raised concerns about the risks of mass biometric surveillance, arguing that there are no sufficient safeguards to prevent abuse. Yet, despite these warnings, the law has moved forward, supported by governments that prioritize security over privacy.

Are We Entering Orwell’s Future?

The parallels with George Orwell’s 1984 are hard to ignore.

In Orwell’s dystopian vision, constant surveillance was a tool of absolute control, erasing any notion of privacy or personal freedom. While Europe’s AI surveillance is not yet at that level, the current trajectory suggests a slow erosion of democratic safeguards in the name of security.

The argument often used by governments is:

"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."

However, history has repeatedly shown that surveillance measures intended for "security" often end up being weaponized against political opposition, journalists, and activists.

France’s Use of AI Surveillance in the 2024 Olympics

During the 2024 Paris Olympics, France experimented with AI-powered video analysis to detect "suspicious behavior" in real time. The system, initially promoted as a way to prevent terrorist threats, ended up being used to monitor protests and public gatherings. This serves as a real-world case study of how surveillance measures can quickly be expanded beyond their original purpose.

Hungary’s Crackdown on Political Dissent

Hungary has already increased its use of AI surveillance tools to track political dissidents and journalists. The new EU law will give governments even more legal justification to expand these practices, making it harder to challenge surveillance abuses.

Balancing AI and Democracy: Is There a Middle Ground?

Not all AI surveillance is inherently bad. Used correctly, AI can help solve crimes, prevent terrorist attacks, and even protect human rights (e.g., tracking human trafficking networks). However, the concern is that without strict oversight, these tools will be exploited by those in power.

Possible Safeguards:

Strict Judicial Oversight: Courts should have a mandatory role in approving AI-based surveillance requests.

Transparency & Public Accountability: Citizens must be informed when and how AI surveillance is used.

Independent Ethics Committees: AI deployments in law enforcement should be monitored by non-governmental organizations.

Public Debate on Surveillance Laws: Instead of fast-tracking AI regulations, governments should open these discussions to the public.

Is Europe at a Crossroads?

The EU’s AI surveillance law represents a turning point in the balance between security and freedom. While officials present it as a necessary tool for modern policing, critics argue that it undermines fundamental rights and opens the door to widespread surveillance abuse.

Europe has long prided itself on being a champion of digital rights and ethical AI regulation. However, with this new law, it risks drifting toward a model where surveillance is normalized under the guise of public safety.

Are we moving toward an era of AI-powered authoritarianism, or can democratic safeguards still prevent mass surveillance?

Further Reading: Orwell vs. Verne – Is Technological Progress a Promise or a Trap?

To explore this topic further, read my article on Orwell and Verne:

P'tit Tôlier

Essayist & Popularizer. I analyze the world through accessible philosophical essays. Complex ideas, explained simply—to help us think about our times.

[azspot]

The vast surveillance apparatus these campaigners decry is often not one owned and controlled by government. In fact, it was developed and rolled out by the private companies cyberlibertarians championed up until very recently, and sometimes still find themselves defending. The internet has enabled the creation of the most intrusive and comprehensive global surveillance system in the history of humanity, as companies developed business models based on mass data collection to shape advertising and other means of targeting users. It’s an infrastructure that has increasingly moved into physical space as well, and one that everyone from hackers to intelligence agencies have been able to use to all manner of nefarious ends.

Reclaiming sovereignty in the digital age

[tmarshconnors]

Labours Authoritarian Overreach

I am absolutely furious. The Labour government, in its relentless drive for total control, has forced Apple to remove its most advanced data security tool End-to-End Encryption for iCloud. This isn’t just a disappointing move it’s an outright betrayal of British citizens and a chilling moment for digital privacy in the UK.

The reason behind this disgraceful decision? Labour’s authoritarianism knows no bounds. They demanded access to user data, forcing tech companies to compromise security under the guise of “public safety.” Governments worldwide loathe zero-access encryption because it keeps them from snooping into people’s lives without their knowledge. And now, thanks to Labour’s overreach, they have exactly what they wanted direct access to your most private information, from messages and emails to personal files stored in iCloud.

Of course, they’ll dress it up in the usual nonsense: “crime prevention,” “protecting the vulnerable.”

And let’s be clear serious crimes such as drug trafficking, child exploitation, and cybercrime absolutely must be tackled. But gutting encryption does not achieve that. Criminals will always find ways to hide their activities. Meanwhile, it’s law-abiding citizens like you who get caught in the web of mass surveillance, losing your fundamental right to privacy in the process.

Make no mistake this isn’t about catching criminals. It’s about control. The Labour government wants unrestricted power to monitor, access, and control digital communications. They are actively stripping away the rights of British citizens under the guise of security. This is an absolute disgrace. It sets a horrifying precedent, not just for the UK but globally. If one government can force tech companies to weaken security, what’s stopping others? Where does it end?

This isn’t paranoia this is how the erosion of freedoms begins, one compromise at a time. Today, it’s encryption. Tomorrow, it’s mandatory backdoors in every device, total government oversight of digital communications, and an end to personal privacy as we know it.

The Labour government must go NOW. I have had it with their authoritarian, nanny-state lunacy. They must be held accountable for this attack on digital freedom, and we must fight back before the UK becomes a full-blown surveillance state.

Privacy isn’t a privilege it’s a right. And Labour has just trampled all over it. If you value your security, if you value your freedom, you should be as enraged as I am.

Enough is enough.

[renovatio06]

NEOM: Saudi Prince Mohammad Bin Salman's China Deals Reveal Dark Side of Mega-City Development Plan | Business Insider

Source: NEOM: Saudi Prince MBS China Deals Reveal Dark Side of Mega-City Plan THE LINE will be an architectural marvel running in a straight line from the mountains of NEOM to the Red Sea. A city built to deliver a new future for humanity.#TheLINE #NEOM pic.twitter.com/5v9NhqFe2p— NEOM (@NEOM) July 25, 2022 Twitter posting announcing NEOM I always thought that saying “I got nothing to hide” was…

[shaquanrod]

#mmiw #Durangocide #EndlessNatureWalkandGiftShop #nativetiktok #indigen...