AIThe Struggle Over AI Surveillance: From Digitalization to Dystopia?

Just as with doctors’ medical practice, purveyors of new technologies should commit to a ‘do no harm’ code of ethics, USAID Administrator Samantha Power said in a keynote speech on 7 June.

It might at least assuage some of the growing anxiety over the implications of artificial intelligence discussed in The Global Struggle Over AI Surveillance: Emerging Trends and Democratic Responses, a new report from the International Forum for Democratic Studies.

“From cameras that identify the faces of passersby to algorithms that keep tabs on public sentiment online, artificial intelligence (AI)-powered tools are opening new frontiers in state surveillance around the world,” states the report, edited by the Forum’s Beth Kerley, which addresses both the democracy implications of new technologies and vectors for civil society involvement in their design, deployment, and operation:

·  AI surveillance systems such as facial recognition cameras, “smart city” projects, predictive policing software, and social media monitoring tools are expanding government surveillance powers in ways that create new and serious risks to privacy and the rule of law.

·  These tools are spreading rapidly, with PRC vendors and those based in democracies both contributing to the growing global AI surveillance marketplace.

·  AI surveillance applications at their most dystopian can be seen in closed autocracies, above all the People’s Republic of China. But surveillance risks extend across regime types.

·  In “swing states”—countries that mix autocratic and democratic tendencies—new surveillance powers threaten to tilt the playing field further toward illiberal governments.

·  While democratic governments and international institutions are beginning to tackle AI governance questions, there is crucial work to do in moving from abstract principles to practical implementation. This will require greater democratic coordination, voluntary steps by the private sector, deeper commitment to government transparency, and active engagement at all stages with civil society and the broader public.

·  Through coalition building and innovative research methods, a number of enterprising organizations have already started the work of challenging opaque surveillance deals and creating the conditions for a more open and informed democratic debate on surveillance practices.

To address the challenge of AI surveillance, democracies need to undertake several major tasks simultaneously, Carnegie Endowment senior fellow Steven Feldstein observes in the lead essay:

·  First, they must define regulatory norms to guide responsible AI use, whether through national AI strategies and legislation or through regional efforts.