Information & Ethics committee  I'll just give a maybe. That's not my expertise.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, I agree with Ms. Molnar completely.

Information & Ethics committee  I have a brief question back to you. When you say “be funding this type of technology”, should governments fund FRT?

Information & Ethics committee  Okay. No, they shouldn't. We're at this point where we're funding a lot of R and D, and some of the R and D can come up as FRT. Again, the end goal should be a ban. We're already seeing the European Parliament calling for a ban on this. It is the latest ban that was called. It

Information & Ethics committee  That is a lot of questions. I'll take up one, which is we should turn the directive on automated decision-making—

Information & Ethics committee  Yes. A quick one would be to improve the directive on automated decision-making. Make sure that the internal reviews that are written every six months actually make it to the public. We're still waiting for the one that was supposed to be released last year. Apparently, it will b

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you for the question, and I'll gladly answer. I love that you stated that “ethics” and “Palantir” are not synonyms, because that is correct. As I already stated, Palantir is a tech data analytics company, and hence this is the problem with the way “AI” is defined by the fe

Information & Ethics committee  We should be really concerned. My next four years of research as a Ph.D. student will be around the privatization of the states specifically with these technologies. I think this will just get bigger. As Ms. Molnar mentioned, public-private partnerships are a key point about pr

Information & Ethics committee  Again, I think we can push back on tech inevitability, and we can say no to some of this technology, but that also requires funding and resources for education around these technologies. A lot of these contracts are made behind closed doors. In industry-government relationships,

Information & Ethics committee  We can go ahead and talk about data analytics firms and Palantir and others that aren't even FRTs. The world of surveillance goes way beyond FRT, and that's a bigger question to have about our country's military-industrial complex and where these technologies even come from. We

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you for the excellent question. Yes, I am aware. One such supplier is Palantir Technologies Inc., which is a data analytics company that worked with the U.S. government to plan mass arrests for nearly 700 people and the separation of children from their parents, causing ir

Information & Ethics committee  I think one is once we write, researchers, investigative journalists, whoever—because we're at this point where our open government isn't really open, we still have to file an access to information request and find all this information—we need you to hear us. So the government no

Information & Ethics committee  I would say no, because we can ban facial recognition. The end of freedom is a very complex and dire question and statement. I would argue that, again, this isn't just about mass surveillance; it's about how our governments interact with industry, how they procure different softw

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, I would argue that there is mass surveillance, but specifically also a discriminatory racist and sexist surveillance, as we know, because this tech is very discriminatory in the way it is on a very computational level. The more we accept it into society the more it will just

Information & Ethics committee  That was the lead of my co-author, Yuan Stevens, who focuses on privacy expertise. I will try to say that GDPR is a good gold standard to have for best practices so far. I would just argue that this is more than data protection or privacy. This is a conversation about the privat