Did Palantir pay for this puff piece? No mention of false positives or how it adds everyone to virtual lineups? “Surveillance state” is put in scare quotes as if it's not literally what is being described.
I don't think it is only Palantir who is beneficiary of this PR. If the deep state is going to be severely raided, voluntarily retired, etc. somebody has to pickup the slack, and the front row at the inauguration is ready with a technology based, i.e. efficient at least in some [DOGE]dimensions, solution as combined together they know everything about everybody.
US based surveillance ("AI") companies started to get their teeth into the UK, e.g. into the NHS, under the previous Tory government, especially when Sunak was PM. Given the current PM's promises on going all in on AI and deregulation, I don't see the situation in the UK being much better than the US to be honest.
> The police there had just rescued a missing child after the young person’s mobile phone was flagged by the technology as being next to a known sex offender’s device.
They looked up where the kid’s phone was and credited AI for the win?
No, they likely put a geolocation net around the child's phone and added everyone in it to a search list. No search warrant required for this type of fishing in the UK afaik. Of course they probably kept all that data they swept up from innocent people who just happened to be near the phone. It's not really AI either. It's just checking things against a list.
If you read the article most of the wins are in allowing to search different databases by unifying the data and merging profiles. The only AI examples are about facial recognition.
The beginnings of dystopia, ushered in with applause. Make no mistake, ubiquitous surveillance + an omnipresent AI enforcer is not a good thing for society. Of course they start with a "think of the children" use case, to ease public opinion on the subject so they can expand from there.
Did Palantir pay for this puff piece? No mention of false positives or how it adds everyone to virtual lineups? “Surveillance state” is put in scare quotes as if it's not literally what is being described.
I don't think it is only Palantir who is beneficiary of this PR. If the deep state is going to be severely raided, voluntarily retired, etc. somebody has to pickup the slack, and the front row at the inauguration is ready with a technology based, i.e. efficient at least in some [DOGE]dimensions, solution as combined together they know everything about everybody.
This article is from and about the UK.
US based surveillance ("AI") companies started to get their teeth into the UK, e.g. into the NHS, under the previous Tory government, especially when Sunak was PM. Given the current PM's promises on going all in on AI and deregulation, I don't see the situation in the UK being much better than the US to be honest.
and btw Sunak is Stanford, pretty much "our", Silicon Valley, guy :)
> The police there had just rescued a missing child after the young person’s mobile phone was flagged by the technology as being next to a known sex offender’s device.
They looked up where the kid’s phone was and credited AI for the win?
No, they likely put a geolocation net around the child's phone and added everyone in it to a search list. No search warrant required for this type of fishing in the UK afaik. Of course they probably kept all that data they swept up from innocent people who just happened to be near the phone. It's not really AI either. It's just checking things against a list.
If you read the article most of the wins are in allowing to search different databases by unifying the data and merging profiles. The only AI examples are about facial recognition.
Also likely a national surveillance tool as well.
Archive Link: https://archive.is/6I4x9
"Major Strasser has been shot... round up the usual suspects"
"Louie, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
The beginnings of dystopia, ushered in with applause. Make no mistake, ubiquitous surveillance + an omnipresent AI enforcer is not a good thing for society. Of course they start with a "think of the children" use case, to ease public opinion on the subject so they can expand from there.
Do not create the torment nexus.
There's little point in telling large tech companies not to create the torment nexus. Creating it is overtly their goal.