June, 11 2020, 12:00am EDT
Amazon's Facial Recognition "Moratorium" Is a Public Relations Stunt. Lawmakers Should Ban this Dangerous Surveillance Tech.
WASHINGTON
Amazon just announced that they will place a one year moratorium on selling their invasive, racially biased facial recognition surveillance software to police. The announcement comes on the heels of one from IBM, who announced plans to get out of the facial recognition business entirely, and questioned whether artificial intelligence powered surveillance should be allowed at all.
Digital rights group Fight for the Future, who have led a coalition of dozens of organizations calling for an outright ban on facial recognition surveillance, issued the following statement, which can be attributed to Deputy Director Evan Greer (she/her):
"This is nothing more than a public relations stunt from Amazon. But it's also a sign that facial recognition is increasingly politically toxic, which is a result of the incredible organizing happening on the ground right now.
Amazon knows that facial recognition software is dangerous. They know it's the perfect tool for tyranny. They know it's racist--and that in the hands of police it will simply exacerbate systemic discrimination in our criminal justice system.
The last sentence of Amazon's statement is telling. They "stand ready to help if requested." They've been calling for the Federal government to "regulate" facial recognition, because they want their corporate lawyers to help write the legislation, to ensure that it's friendly to their surveillance capitalist business model. It's likely Congress will impose some limitations on police use of facial recognition soon. Amazon wants to pretend it was their idea all along. They'll spend the next year "improving" the accuracy of their facial recognition algorithms, making it even more effective as an Orwellian surveillance tool. Then they'll unleash their army of lobbyists to push for industry-friendly "regulations" that assuage public concern while allowing them to profit.
We also know that Amazon has marketed their face surveillance technology to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and their statement doesn't say whether this moratorium will apply to other government agencies that routinely violate human rights. Amazon's Ring surveillance doorbell company still maintains more than 1,000 surveillance partnerships with police departments across the country, enabling automated racial profiling and surveillance of entire neighborhoods.
The reality is that facial recognition technology is too dangerous to be used at all. Like nuclear or biological weapons, it poses such a profound threat to the future of humanity that it should be banned outright. Lawmakers need to stop pandering to Big Tech companies and corrupt law enforcement agencies and do their jobs. Congress should act immediately to ban facial recognition for all surveillance purposes."
Fight for the Future has been leading a national campaign backed by dozens of other grassroots organizations calling for an outright ban on law enforcement and government use of facial recognition. In February, the group expanded its efforts to explicitly call for lawmakers to also ban private individuals, institutions, and corporations from using this technology in public places, for surveillance purposes, or without the subjects' knowledge and affirmative consent, such as unlocking a phone. Even seemingly innocuous uses of facial recognition, like speeding up lines or using your face as a form of payment, normalize the act of handing over sensitive biometric information and pose a serious threat to security and civil liberties.
Fight for the Future worked with Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine and other artists to lead a successful campaign to keep facial recognition technology out of US music festivals and live concerts. More than 40 of the worlds' largest festivals including Coachella, Bonnaroo, and SXSW confirmed they won't use the tech at their events. The group then worked with Students for a Sensible Drug Policy to get more than 60 prominent colleges and universities to confirm they won't use facial recognition on campus. 150+ university faculty issued an open letter echoing student demands to ban the use of face surveillance on college campuses. Students across the country held a national day of action in March.
The group is currently supporting protesters with surveillance self-defense advice, pressuring local elected officials to shut down Amazon Ring's surveillance partnerships with police, running campaigns to oppose the reauthorization of FISA and Patriot Act surveillance authorities, calling on Zoom to offer end-to-end encryption to all users, and working to stop the EARN IT act, which threatens both end to end encryption and online freedom of expression. Follow us on Twitter @fightfortheftr.
Fight for the Future is a group of artists, engineers, activists, and technologists who have been behind the largest online protests in human history, channeling Internet outrage into political power to win public interest victories previously thought to be impossible. We fight for a future where technology liberates -- not oppresses -- us.
(508) 368-3026LATEST NEWS
While Silent on Apartheid, Israelis Protest Netanyahu Firing Minister Who Urged Halt to Judicial Coup
"This is all so inspiring—and at the same time, so dreadful to know that all these forces have been silent for so long on apartheid. Silent, or actively participating and profiting from it," said one Israeli journalist.
Mar 26, 2023
Decades into the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine, massive crowds flooded Israel's streets on Sunday for another round of demonstrations to "save a democracy that never existed," as one journalist recently put it.
Sunday's protests were sparked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firing Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who a day earlier advocated for a one-month pause to an ongoing judicial overhaul "for the sake of Israel's security," given military reservists' concerns. Saturday also saw hundreds of thousands of Israelis join nationwide rallies, the 12th straight week of mass action against the looming changes.
"The state of Israel's security has always been and will forever be my life's mission," Gallant, a member of Netanyahu's Likud party and former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) commander, declared in response to his dismissal.
A White House National Security Council spokesperson said, "We are deeply concerned by the ongoing developments in Israel, including the potential impact on military readiness raised by Minister Gallant, which further underscores the urgent need for compromise."
The Movement for Quality Government in Israel, which is also fighting against the judicial overhaul, argued Gallant's ouster "proves once again" that Netanyahu "is not institutionally, ethically, or morally qualified" to serve as prime minister and vowed to consider legal action to stop the "scandalous and disgraceful" dismissal.
Israeli analyst Meron Rapoport
toldMiddle East Eye that Gallant's firing was "a desperate, extreme move by Netanyahu," whose decision was blasted by political opponents and other key Israeli figures while praised by far-right leaders.
"Netanyahu's descent into authoritarian madness," as one U.S. reporter described it, leaves Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich—the Religious Zionism leader who recently said that "there's no such thing as Palestinians" and Israel should "wipe out" the Palestinian village of Hawara—as the only minister in Israel's Ministry of Defense.
Israeli Defense Ministry Director General Eyal Zamir on Sunday decided to cut short his trip to the United States. In Israel, demonstrators filled Tel Aviv's main highway. Police used water cannons on protesters who broke through barricades at Netanyahu's residence in Jerusalem. Universities announced an indefinite strike. On Monday, dozens of doctors intend to call in "sick" while 26 heads of local authorities plan to launch a hunger strike at the prime minister's office.
In what one reporter said "could be a game-changer," the head of Histadrut, the Israeli trade union federation that has so far resisted pressure to join protests against the judicial coup, scheduled a press conference for late Monday morning.
After 18 "fulfilling and rewarding" months as the Israeli consul general in New York, Asaf Zamir resigned Sunday, saying that "following today's developments, it is now time for me to join the fight for Israel's future to ensure it remains a beacon of democracy and freedom in the world."
Meanwhile, Israeli journalist Haggai Matar, executive director of +972 Magazine and Local Call, said in a series of tweets that Gallant, who should be tried at the International Criminal Court "for his war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza," was fired "for the wrong reasons."
"Netanyahu fired him for trying to slow down Israel's transition into a fully authoritarian state toward Jews," Matar wrote. "Of course, it has been a dictatorship toward Palestinians for decades, and now that logic is expanding into Israel and Jews, while paving the way for even worse attacks on Palestinians."
Of the latest protests, he added: "This is all so inspiring—and at the same time, so dreadful to know that all these forces have been silent for so long on apartheid. Silent, or actively participating and profiting from it. And yet now they are on an all-out battle under the slogan of democracy."
American-Israeli reporter Mairav Zonszein wrote for The Daily Beast on Wednesday that "Israelis who have bent the rule of law to suit their ideology for decades are now themselves becoming the target of a far-right that is using its newly won power to bend it even further."
"Each party in the Israeli government has specific and explicit goals that the various laws in this judicial overhaul package would serve," Zonszein explained. Ultra-Orthodox parties want to ensure "their constituency does not have to serve in the military" and the Shas Party aims to enable leader Aryeh Deri "to serve as a minister despite several recent convictions of tax fraud."
"For the religious, nationalist, racist, far-right parties—Jewish Power and Religious Zionism, both headed by settlers who are now senior ministers in government—it's about extending Israeli sovereignty over all occupied territory," she continued. The Likud party wants to keep expanding "Israel's settlement enterprise, consolidate power over media, culture, and public institutions—and for Netanyahu, it is about assuming enough control over the courts, through appointing judges, to evade conviction."
Netanyahu, who
did not campaign on judicial reforms, returned to power last year—and established the most far-right government in Israel's history—despite facing various charges of corruption, which he denies.
"The act of creating new laws in order to serve its interests on the ground is precisely what Israel has been doing for 56 years as an occupying power," Zonszein stressed, adding:
While protesters—many of them among the most privileged in Israeli society—walk in the streets demanding the "rule of law" and "democracy," Israeli forces are demolishing Palestinian homes; standing alongside settlers who are terrorizing Palestinians; denying freedom of movement and assembly; holding people in prolonged detention without trial; killing unarmed protesters; carrying out torture; and deporting Palestinian activists. And within Israel, Palestinian citizens face structural discrimination and inequality under an explicit policy that prioritizes Jewish rights.
[...]
There is also a small but dedicated anti-occupation bloc that carries signs at the protests with messages like: "There is no democracy with occupation" and "Democracy for all from the river to the sea." At one of the recent protests, a gray-haired woman held up a sign that may sum it up best: "We were silent about occupation, we got a dictatorship."
U.S.-Palestinian journalist and Palestine Chronicle editor Ramzy Baroud contended in an opinion piece for Common Dreams earlier this month that "a proper engagement with the ongoing protests is to further expose how Tel Aviv utilizes the judicial system to maintain the illusion that Israel is a country of law and order, and that all the actions and violence in Palestine, however bloody and destructive, are fully justifiable according to the country's legal framework."
"Yes, Israel should be sanctioned, not because of Netanyahu's attempt at co-opting the judiciary, but because the system of apartheid and regime of military occupation constitute complete disregard and utter violation of international law," Baroud concluded. "Whether Israelis like it or not, international law is the only law that matters to an occupied and oppressed nation."
Yonah Lieberman, co-founder of the U.S. group IfNotNow, noted that earlier in the weekend, Israeli soldiers forced Palestinian worshippers out of the Al-Aqsa Mosque during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Responding to footage from Israeli protests Sunday night, Lieberman said: "Furious young people fighting an authoritarian for their rights. Reminds you of popular uprisings that have happened over and over again across the world. But if these were young Palestinians they would have been shot—the Jewish privilege inherent in Israel's apartheid system."
"A popular uprising to overthrow Netanyahu and his extremist government will not lead to democracy and equality for all in Israel," he added. "Only overthrowing the entire apartheid system will lead to democracy and equality for all."
This post has been updated with comment from Yonah Lieberman.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In First TikTok, AOC Says Solution Is Not Ban But Strong Privacy Laws
"Our first priority should be in protecting your ability to exist without social media companies harvesting and commodifying every single piece of data about you without you and without your consent," the Democrat argues.
Mar 26, 2023
Amid a national debate over whether Congress should ban TikTok, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Saturday posted her first video on the social media platform to make the case for shifting the focus to broad privacy protections for Americans.
The New York Democrat's move follows TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew testifying before the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee as well as rights content creators, privacy advocates, and other progressive lawmakers rallying against a company-specific ban on Capitol Hill earlier this week.
Supporters of banning TikTok—which experts say would benefit its Big Tech competitors, Google, Meta, and Snap—claim to be concerned that ByteDance, the company behind the video-sharing platform, could share data with the Chinese government.
Meanwhile, digital rights advocates such as Fight for the Future director Evan Greer have argued that if really policymakers want to protect Americans from the surveillance capitalist business model also embraced by U.S. tech giants, "they should advocate for strong data privacy laws that prevent all companies (including TikTok!) from collecting so much sensitive data about us in the first place, rather than engaging in what amounts to xenophobic showboating that does exactly nothing to protect anyone."
Ocasio-Cortez embraced that argument, saying in her inaugural video: "Do I believe TikTok should be banned? No."
"I think it's important to discuss how unprecedented of a move this would be," Ocasio-Cortez says. "The United States has never before banned a social media company from existence, from operating in our borders, and this is an app that has over 150 million Americans on it."
Advocates of banning TikTok "say because of this egregious amount of data harvesting, we should ban this app," she explains. "However, that doesn't really address the core of the issue, which is the fact that major social media companies are allowed to collect troves of deeply personal data about you that you don't know about without really any significant regulation whatsoever."
"In fact, the United States is one of the only developed nations in the world that has no significant data or privacy protection laws on the books," the congresswoman stresses, pointing to the European Union's legislation as an example. "So to me, the solution here is not to ban an individual company, but to actually protect Americans from this kind of egregious data harvesting that companies can do without your significant ability to say no."
"Usually when the United States is proposing a very major move that has something to do with significant risk to national security, one of the first things that happens is that Congress receives a classified briefing," she notes, adding that no such event has happened. "So why would we be proposing a ban regarding such a significant issue without being clued in on this at all? It just doesn't feel right to me."
The "Squad" member further argues that "we are a government by the people and for the people—and if we want to make a decision as significant as banning TikTok," any information that could justify such a policy "should be shared with the public."
"Our first priority," Ocasio-Cortez concludes, "should be in protecting your ability to exist without social media companies harvesting and commodifying every single piece of data about you without you and without your consent."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Passing on Senate Run, Ro Khanna Endorses 'Progressive Leader' Barbara Lee
"I know Barbara will not only fight for, but will deliver on our progressive priorities that are long overdue like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and ending the filibuster," said the Democratic congressman.
Mar 26, 2023
Congressman Ro Khanna announced on CNN Sunday that he will not run for U.S. Senate and is endorsing fellow California Democrat Rep. Barbara Lee in the closely watched 2024 race for retiring Sen. Dianne Feinstein's seat.
"I have concluded that despite a lot of enthusiasm from Bernie folks, the best place, the most exciting place, action place, fit place, for me to serve as a progressive is in the House of Representatives," said Khanna, who co-chaired the 2020 presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"And I'm honored to be co-chairing Barbara Lee's campaign for the Senate and endorsing her today. We need a strong anti-war senator and she will play that role," the congressman told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union."
In a statement, Khanna stressed that "Barbara is the progressive leader Californians need right now, and her solid record as one of Congress' most outspoken champions of justice speaks for itself."
"I know Barbara will not only fight for, but will deliver on our progressive priorities that are long overdue like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and ending the filibuster," he continued. "There's a reason she's beloved by Gen Z. Because Barbara understands the issues facing young people today and knows it is our responsibility to protect our rights, our democracy, and the planet for the next generation."
"What's more, I believe that representation matters. And for far too long, our country's institutions have failed to reflect that reality," added Khanna, noting that there is not currently a Black woman serving as a Democratic senator.
So far, Lee's opponents are two other Democrats representing California in the U.S. House of Representatives: Katie Porter and Adam Schiff. Feinstein, who is 89, confirmed her long-anticipated retirement plans last month.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.