 |
| Where Are The TechnoDemocracies? |
The desire of the Chinese government to use technology for social control and management is becoming more evident. As this technology advances and abuses by the Chinese government escalate under President Xi Jinping, the United States has vowed to counter the rise of "technological authoritarianism." The United States presented its own technology—and that of its allies—as a democratic alternative. But is it really so?
The Internet is familiar with the Chinese government's Great Firewall, which blocks the country's residents from accessing hundreds of thousands of websites outside of China. Using a combination of coercion and incentives, the authorities are forcing major Chinese internet companies to more effectively censor online performance using a combination of human and artificial intelligence. Internet users' attempts to "extend" the firewall or place sensitive information through creative means, such as the use of homonyms or graphics, cannot be compared to a one-sided arms race. Offline and in physical space, China's Ministry of Public Security (MPS) has built a complex, multi-layered architecture of national mass surveillance over the past two decades, entangling people in an increasingly tight web. The government issues a national identity card to every citizen and requires people to use that number to access many public and private services. The requirement to "register a real name" allows the police to collect and maintain a large database of profiles associated with individual identifiers. At the same time, the government covered the country with CCTV cameras. Authorities have bought artificial intelligence technology from private companies, some with ties to the state and the military, to help them automatically decipher useful information from public surveillance video feeds. The mass surveillance system of the Chinese authorities is not just trying to isolate certain individuals from the crowd. They seek to turn "unstructured information" into "structured information" by transforming a chaotic field of vision into something resembling a text file that can be easily parsed and searched for automatically. On the visual front, the AI extracts information from live or archive footage, such as the size and direction of the crowd, and the color and type of objects present, even if the person has acne or raised eyebrows. As a result, the search for this feature ("Where is the red umbrella") can be easily performed and even in real time. While Chinese police rely heavily on visual surveillance in the form of CCTV networks, their surveillance systems incorporate other technologies. It includes an IMSI interceptor that finds and monitors all active and networked phones in a specified area and automatically detects unique identifiers on people's phones and other connected devices, such as IMEI numbers and MAC addresses. Surveillance also includes collecting samples of their voices, DNA, scanning their irises and even their walks to create multimedia images. https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/256955 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/258463 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/255464 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/259043 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/256566 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/256816 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/258720 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/257511 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/259062 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/261553 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/260272 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/262043 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/262248 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/261060 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/261250 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/261272 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/261587 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/261955 https://new.c.mi.com/th/post/263588 https://backlinktool.io/p/L02wkDsxECadHJxVvGSV.html https://gamestoplayonplanet.org/playstation-vr2-launches-in-february-at-549-99/ https://caribbeanfever.com/photo/albums/ndaywowrixif https://geonews.site/where-are-the-technodemocracies/ https://muckrack.com/medincici3-4twewsfd/bio http://zacriley.ning.com/photo/albums/ndaywowrixif https://pastelink.net/adm6yk42 http://playit4ward-sanantonio.ning.com/photo/albums/ndaywowrixif https://www.artstation.com/cicimedin7/profile https://healingxchange.ning.com/photo/albums/ndaywowrixif https://rextester.com/HUYFP83336 http://allabouturanch.com/photo/albums/ndaywowrixif http://taylorhicks.ning.com/photo/albums/ndaywowrixif For example, you can forgo 3D printed masks to bypass facial recognition, but multimodal mass surveillance tends to be ubiquitous, ubiquitous, and ubiquitous—almost inevitable. The police also use analysis systems to identify relationships and uncover offenses. For example, in Xinjiang, where the government is cracking down on Uyghurs, a big data system called the Integrated Joint Operations Platform detects behavior that authorities consider suspicious, such as phones suddenly ringing, and reports those people for questioning. Arbitrary detention and prosecution. Many of these surveillance technologies are not unique to China. But the depth, breadth, and penetration of the Chinese government's massive surveillance of its citizens is perhaps unprecedented in recent history. This massive surveillance is not objectionable in China, where there is little to no meaningful management control and the MPS is largely irresponsible. Other government tools, such as central bank digital currencies, which, among other things, allow authorities to monitor and control people's financial transactions, are not part of the MPS' policing framework. But it bears the stamp of the Chinese government's technological despotism: a top-down form of government that controls people and strongly influences their behavior, placing limits on what is acceptable and what is not. China's emerging and developing "tech field" also includes other accessible and functional technologies. Huawei 5G equipment is reported to have been adopted by dozens of countries. Beijing's Beidou navigation system currently outperforms the US version of GPS in more than 160 countries. TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, has gone global. Alibaba is making headway in Southeast Asia, and Tencent's WeChat is supporting the Chinese diaspora. While most private companies are headquartered in China, they are all vulnerable to varying degrees of pressure, censorship, and censorship from the Chinese government. It is well known that technological systems and their impact on society have nowhere to study, since many of these systems are black boxes, the trade secrets of which are carefully guarded by companies. Given the lack of rule of law and freedom of the press in China, it is extremely difficult to get information from these companies or hold them accountable for violations. China's tech realm supports a highly innovative model of government: a technocratic state ruled by powerful people who effectively instill people with the illusion of modernity and progress. On the contrary, democracies, with their competitive elections, free media, and independent judiciaries, seem sluggish, chaotic, driven by particular interests, and unresponsive to the challenges of our times. The technological bells and whistles of this governance model reinforce the Chinese Communist Party's overall effort to make democracy obsolete. However, it is important not to exaggerate China's technological capabilities. China's ambitions for mass policing are often hindered by issues such as the consolidation of data stored in data warehouses. But if the outlines of China's technological authoritarianism become clearer than ever, how will the democracies, especially the United States, react? The US government considers the Chinese government its main competitor and characterizes this competition as valuable, including from a technological point of view. Former President Donald Trump's Clean Web efforts, for example, aim to encourage other governments and network operators to work with companies that meet a range of criteria, especially in democracies and the rule of law, and because they have a transparent ownership structure. . Structures - with the exception of companies. China from US telecommunications networks. It also limits Chinese tech companies' access to US technology, finance and markets, citing human rights concerns. In return, the Biden administration created the US-EU Trade and Technology Council "to disseminate new technologies based on shared democratic values, including respect for human rights." Although these initiatives come from different sides of the widening political divide, they have one thing in common - their emphasis on values, which is related to the words "democracy" and "human rights" interspersed in this policy document. However, there are at least three shortcomings in this version of the US government. First, behind the declared desire to promote certain values, there is real politics and protectionism, at least behind some of the measures taken against Chinese technology. While it is true that TikTok, for example, is a privacy threat, the sensitive data of almost everyone in the US is also available in commercial data sharing markets. This is because Congress has never adopted comprehensive national standards that severely restrict the collection, use, purchase, and sale of personal information by most companies. If the Trump administration really cared about privacy, it would prioritize passing federal privacy rules that appear to be bipartisan in 2019. Second, the narrative suggests that technologies created and developed in the United States or other democratic countries inherently and automatically respect more rights. Nothing is further from the truth. From the very beginning, democratic companies have been directly involved in the establishment of the Chinese government's surveillance state. North American companies are reported to have helped build Beijing's surveillance infrastructure, including the Great Firewall. US companies continue to provide "ingredients, funding and know-how" to strengthen China's surveillance infrastructure. Some of these companies are still listed as "clean" under Trump's "Clean Web" program for "refusing to do business with the state regulator of the Communist Party of China." At the same time, the mass surveillance by the Americans, the extent and extent of which was revealed by former NSA operative Edward Snowden, inspired colleagues from the Chinese military police surveillance complex. American surveillance of allies and partners, such as the European Commission or the telephone of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, has left an indelible mark on the Atlantic. The idea that technologies developed or produced by democracies (or even close allies) are inherently safe or respectful of rights has not always caught on in Europe. Domestically, mass surveillance and massive data collection have undermined media freedom, the public's right to know, the right to legal aid, and the ability of Americans to hold governments to account, as documented by Human Rights Watch. In American cities, especially in over-regulated communities of color, the increasing use of facial recognition threatens people's right to freely roam the streets without government oversight. In addition, the business model that some of America's dominant technology companies rely on is inherently incompatible with human rights. This model is based on an online advertising ecosystem that captures everything people say or do online, creates profiles, and uses that data to generate interest and participation on the platform when selling targeted ads. The platform economy is based on mass tracking and profiling of users who invade people's privacy and power algorithms that encourage and amplify divisive and sensational content. After all, the idea that the establishment of "democratic values, including the observance of human rights" can replace the guarantees and controls necessary for the functioning of democracy, is a technical solution idea and oversimplifies the operation of technological systems. good storytelling against the evils used by the US government obscure its role and that of Western corporations in undermining human rights and democracy, including their global influence. The privacy of people and civil society organizations in other countries is threatened not only by mass surveillance systems sold by Chinese companies, but also by various technology companies, many of which are based in democratic countries, and fraudulent business models. and the practices they carry out. The United States can offer a viable alternative to China's digital authoritarianism if it is willing to reconsider and prioritize rights at home and abroad. First, Congress must enact tough federal privacy laws governing the collection, analysis, and disclosure of personal information by companies, including security and intelligence agencies. It should tighten the protection of sensitive personal data, including biometric data, and consider banning law enforcement from using facial recognition. It should also regulate the use of data by advertisers and data brokers. In addition, the law should mandate an assessment of the human rights impact of US technology companies' global operations. Congress should also reform national security surveillance laws such as B. Repeal section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to end mass data collection. The United States must work with like-minded governments to strengthen export control systems both domestically and globally so that they do not contribute to cross-border repression. Particular attention in this work should be paid to the study of Chinese companies involved in the development and support of fraudulent systems. The tech surveillance field in China is big business and more research is needed to examine how many players exist, how they are connected to each other and, most importantly, how many companies outside of China in particular are connected to this nefarious system. technology use. Twice how to distinguish between them. More research is needed to determine whether US restrictions have had the desired effect on Chinese tech companies and whether they have been able to get around them. The United States should also prioritize and intensify its work with like-minded governments in organizations such as the International Telecommunication Union to incorporate human rights frameworks into technical standards, especially Internet governance standards. But curbing the worst trends through regulation alone is not enough. The US government should allocate resources to experiment with bold proposals such as B. Technology norms that could have a positive impact on democracy. The nonprofit New Public of America called on the government to develop "digital public spaces"—publicly owned online spaces designed to maximize public goods so that people "can speak, share, and connect without distorting those relationships or creating incentive structures for profit." She joined a group of civilian hackers g0v, members of Audrey Tang's group, who later became the country's digital minister, to integrate collaborative decision making into her Decidim Barcelona government, another experiment with a participatory democracy platform. America can become a true leader by keeping its worst technological impulses at home, preventing its technologies from falling into the wrong hands, and supporting the development of technologies that promote democratic participation. It will offer a real alternative to the digital tyranny of the Chinese government. |