Mr. Chair, I am sitting here in Hamilton Centre. I'll share with this committee that I had some concerns that we weren't perhaps using our best time at this committee in dealing with this particular case, given everything that's happening around the world, but in today's interventions and the study, particularly with this panel, I feel like we are seized with the question.
The question for me, what stuck with me, is Professor Deneault's reference to Facebook as a weapon of math destruction, understanding the ways in which AI can take big data and know people better than themselves and manipulate public discourse. I can only reference what's happening outside on Parliament Hill today, and in fact in cities across this country. I would say this is a very important discussion.
The professor acknowledged or at least referenced the idea of stopping production at the source, agreeing to stop developing certain types of tools. He talked about the way in which big data, ranging from mobility to social media and other surfing habits online, could lead to compromised democracies. I think about Pegasus, which is the spyware developed by the Israeli cyber arms company NSO Group, which is known to be used by countries around the world to compromise people.
My question for Professor Deneault is one that I've asked in the past: What major philosophical or sociological considerations that have arisen in Canada as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic should the federal government take into account when making decisions that impact Canadians' privacy? I would go further and allow him to elaborate on—in a broader sense, given this moment we're in—what measures we should be taking to safeguard people against the possibility of AI manipulation and other ways we can be compromised in our democratic processes and discourse.