Keller Postman LLC’s Post

AI Playtime: Exploring California Law's Approach to AI in Toys & Child Privacy How does California law tackle the embedding of AI in toys and the potential implications for child privacy? https://lnkd.in/gfNWTagF

Technology gets blamed for violating peoples' rights. But it's the proponents of this technology, who often have little awareness, let alone concern for peoples' rights, who are at fault. Generally this all goes back to debates about ethics in the hacker communities. A hacker may learn how to crack a security system, and from this experience, they reason: "You don't want me to come in, so you put up a fence. But your fence is stupid, and I can knock it over. Therefore I have the right to cross your stupid fence. Other stupid people don't have the right, because they're stupid just like you. But I'm not stupid, so I have the right." In other words, if you ABLE to do something, you CAN do something, and that is exactly the same thing as having the RIGHT to do it. Much of Silicon Valley thinks this way. "Rules are for sheepish fools who believe they have to do what they're told, but the bureaucrats who make the rules are not as smart as me." In the case of privacy, or copyright, or fair use, it's much the same kind of psychopathic reasoning: "You go outside. Your body reflects photons. The photons are not your property. My camera catches some of those photons. I have your picture. So what? And by the way, that microphone might be turned on." Or, "If a person can read your unoriginal, derived article and incorporate it into their own unoriginal, derived thinking, than why can't my AI read your unoriginal, derived article and do the same thing? After all, nothing is authentic anyway." So what do we do? How do we deal with this? With civil AND criminal laws, regulations, accountability, and punishment for people who do not respect other people's property, money, identity, or boundaries.

This is the third writing of Areej Sohail Bhutta on a very essential, interesting and emerging area of law, that is needed to be spoken of, its merits and demerits, contours and legal boundaries. Take part in the discourse! #lawandtechnology #AI #privacyrights #dignityandrespect https://lnkd.in/dTKj_-sv

AI, Privacy to Dominate Tech Policy Debate in Washington in 2024 Lawmakers returning to Washington next week face a busy legislative calendar, and wedged into that jam-packed agenda is a sprawling list of technology priorities. Addressing the artificial intelligence boom, keeping children safe online, protecting Americans’ digital privacy, and increasing broadband access are among the many tech policy debates expected to shake out on Capitol Hill in 2024.

[Face Search Company Clearview AI Overturns UK Privacy Fine] A company which enables its clients to search a database of billions of images scraped from the internet for matches to a particular face has won an appeal against the UK’s privacy watchdog. Last year, Clearview AI was fined more than £7.5m by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for unlawfully storing facial images. Jack Mulcaire, Clearview AI’s lawyer, said the firm was “pleased”. The ICO said it would “take stock” of the judgement. Clearview AI offers its clients a system that works like a search engine for faces – users upload a photo and it finds matches in a database of billions of images it has collected. It then provides links to where matching images appear online. In March, Clearview’s founder Hoan Ton-That told the BBC it had run nearly a million searches for US police, helping them to solve a range of crimes, including murders. He also revealed its database contained 30 billion images scraped from the internet. Critics argue that law enforcement’s use of Clearview’s technology puts everyone into a “perpetual police line-up”. And prior to the ICO’s action, now ruled unlawful, France, Italy and Australia had also taken action against the firm. In the past Clearview AI had commercial customers, but since a 2020 settlement in a case brought by US civil liberties campaigners, the firm now only accepts clients who carry out criminal law enforcement or national security functions. Clearview does not have UK or EU clients, but its customers are based in the US and in other countries including Panama, Brazil, Mexico, and the Dominican Republic, Tuesday’s judgement revealed. Read full News here: https://lnkd.in/e7iVTAnV Credit: BBC News #galaxytechnews #technology #technews #techtips

In the fast-changing realm of technological progress, facial recognition stands out as a potent yet contentious tool. Europe finds itself at the crossroads of innovation and privacy rights, and the discussion surrounding the deployment of facial recognition software has become a focal point, with Brussels becoming a pivotal battleground for this debate. #FacialRecognition #TechnologyDebate #PrivacyRights #Innovation #Controversy #EuropeTech #BrusselsDebate #PrivacyVsInnovation #TechAdvancements #DigitalEthics

US senator says federal privacy bill can address AI discrimination: U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said the Consumer Online Privacy Rights Act, a bill she introduced in 2019 and again in 2021, could "help protect people from discrimination fueled by artificial intelligence," MediaPost reports. Cantwell said AI can produce opportunities but there also should be "'guardrails' for potential pitfalls." She said her bill would allow consumers to opt-in to receiving targeted advertisements and impose requirements for companies that deploy algorithms. Full story #dataprotection #dataprivacy #privacy

This is what I call circular data economy where the "oil" is fuel we can use for our own insights, patterns, trust and what will unfold as our twin population. We will have unprecedented trust in collectives and cooperatives with buying power and public knowledge. Welcome to privacy moving from profiling and surveillance to being two-sided. Our "work" of identifying ourselves over and over again has built an invisible digital life we will be able to see and use as new connectivity. #HumanONE #WeAreData (too).

#Zoom just shot itself in the foot with the new Terms of Service revisions! 🤯 Now, they can use your copyrighted content as they wish. 🤭 The clash between intellectual property rights holders and Zoom seems inevitable. Will Zoom need a team like #YouTube's to identify and remove copyrighted content? 🎥 And what about their generative AI model? Can they use all content to feed it? 🤔 It raises questions about the conflict between #intellectualpropertyrights and Zoom. Will Zoom come out on top? 🏆 On another note, 11 US states have already enacted #consumer #dataprivacy laws similar to GDPR. The Right to be Forgotten is a key tenet, requiring organizations to permanently remove consumer data upon request. But here's the twist: how do you remove that #personaldata from a #generativeAI? 🤷♀️ How do you train the #Al to forget and erase any inferences made from that data? 🧠 Will #consumerprivacy laws need rewriting to tackle this challenge? Or will consumers gain a powerful right to action against orgs like Zoom? 📝 Zoom attempted to clarify their new policy in a blog post, but it only highlights the growing controversy around #consent. Informed consent is crucial for data #privacyregulation, but some organizations interpret it creatively. An easily-ignored cookie banner doesn't cut it ethically. 🍪 I'd love to hear thoughts from Marijana Sarolic Robic, Vlaho Hrdalo, Vedran Antoljak, Aco Momcilovic and Katarina Ćosić on these serious privacy implications!