Surveillance program that apparently was not so new uh the government’s been doing it for a while but it’s now been revealed authorities were tracking Americans using phone records AT&T was allegedly involved we’ll also be talking about the United Nations advancing an agenda well a new agenda but with some
Updates against eating meat so if you like eating meat well it’s a you might have to spar with the United Nations over pretty soon first off thought what’s happening with these AI weapons first of all now weapon systems run by artificial intelligence could become tools that basically humans
Can’t compete with the process of analyzing a Target identifying it as a possible threat and then pulling the trigger you know to kill would be faster for AI than it would for any human the process of going through that and making sure you have the right target AI does it almost
Instantaneously there would be weapons that don’t need to sleep don’t Daydream don’t need to take breaks and don’t need to eat or anything else and they raise massive ethical issues and now there’s a debate on whether the Pentagon should allow them especially as other countries begin to push them be adopted into our
Own military let me show you this as his business Insight it says this lethal autonomous weapons that can select targets using AI are being developed by countries uh including the US China and Israel it says the use of so-called Killer Robots would Mark a disturbing development say critics handing life and
Death Battlefield decisions to machines with no human input several governments are lobbying the United Nations for binding resolutions restricting the use of AI killer drones but the US is among the group of Nations which also includes Russia Australia and Israel who are resisting any such moves favoring a nonbinding resolution instead meaning
Hey you know they can talk about it but nobody has to follow it New York Times had something else as well it said from landmines to drones Tech has driven fears about autonomous arms concerns about weapons that can kill without a human decision is not entirely new now
Really it’s complicated when you get into the weeds of it these weapons in my opinion are terrible imagine the possibilities of having drones you know going out and having the ability to kill humans when we think of robots a lot of us think of like early Sci-Fi movies and
You know the Terminator and stuff like that the reality of these though would often be things that maybe it would be like the um you know flying drones that you can buy pretty cheap it would be systems that would use technology as simple as like facial recognition on a
Phone only the facial recognition feature doubles as the targeting device I I’ve actually seen people develop very very cheap versions of this actually using a cell phone uh and using the camera and facial recognition as a tool to identify targets uh this can be done very cheaply it’s not even necessarily
Something that needs to be done by militaries and it’s something you’ve even seen coming about to some extent on battlefields including in Syria and other places where people have been making Auto turrets although the a lot of the ones they make are have some degree of human input but turrets that
Humans don’t necessarily need to man this is very quickly becoming the future of war and as this does develop you’re going to see not only again major militaries considering the use of it but even smaller terrorist groups even cartels and notably there have been cases of them doing things like this
Already and especially as it gets into let’s say larger groups militias ter you know larger terrorist organizations and eventually into militaries they’re going to have to Grapple with the problem that if somebody else is doing it you’re not going to be able to compete unless you do it also one of the
Big concerns that the US has with this idea of a non-binding agreement is based on that concept that America could sign a binding agreement meaning we will not develop these weapons but if for example we don’t have any of the weapons developed we’ve never done any research
On them it’s illegal we can’t do it and the war starts and our enemies are deploying those kinds of weapons we’re going to get wiped out for the US military that’s a big concern because we need to be ahead of the curve we need to be better than the other militaries of
The world because that’s how National Defense works you want to win the war as you fight but unfortunately it could easily become a future of warfare that I think represents a future that we don’t necessarily want this takes humans really in my opinion down a very dangerous path but at this point it’s
Becoming almost inevitable it takes humans now time to analyze and respond to threats if you’re for example a police officer and you’re in a home and you’re looking for a suspect and someone jumps out you can’t just shoot them you know at least preferably not uh you need to make sure
It’s not a civilian you need to make sure that it’s not someone who has who’s armed you need to make sure it’s not a kid you need to make sure that it’s not the person you’re looking for essentially and then to analyze that threat and determine whether they pose a
Threat to you or not and for humans that’s one of the more difficult parts of War even again policing if you look at videos and footage of what’s happening in Ukraine right now you might have seen that you have troops putting like colored tape on their helmets on
Their arms all over them because they’re trying to identify who’s who the ukrainians want to make sure they don’t shoot other ukrainians the Russians want to make sure they don’t shoot other Russians Friendly Fire becomes a real concern on the battlefield and there’s always a brief moment of pause where you
Wonder is that an enemy or is that one of my allies computers going through that process can do it almost instantaneously and that is one of the the big concerns that comes about when you deal with AI weapons that can choose targets analyze targets and in this case
Even choose to fire killing the target uh based with without using any kind of human input or analysis or anything I should note there are some weapon systems already already deployed in the United States that solve most of that process and only you know kind of allow
The the pilot or the troop to carry out the order to fire if you deal with things like some of the attack helicopters in the United States there’s incredible technology with those things where they even have eye tracking for example uh really the way weapons are developing in terms of
Targeting and such is is that Split Second that means the difference of life and death any type of Engagement is very much like the old west duels you know take 10 steps turn around and fire and the process process of turning around analyzing your target pointing aiming
And shooting uh really a couple seconds or even half a second is the difference between winning and losing now militaries again face a lot of problems with this and there’s also some issues again of basic human needs attentiveness some militaries have tried getting around the human needs by doing things
Like you know super soldier experiments the Nazis the Soviets they all had things like this funny enough they give them like amphetamines like meth in order to keep troops awake for days especially you’re Manning a machine gun but generally speaking the human mind has its limits troops get shell shock
Troops get PTSD troops start longing for home troops start having loyalty issues uh they get tired they have to go to the bathroom they have to eat they have to they have to you know take care of their basic needs and they’re not going to be 100% watching for targets all the time
Computers and AI systems bypass that entire thing now you could argue that we’ve already in the especially in the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq began dehumanizing War to a large extent people have pointed to the the very strange way that for example we fight with drones where troops you know
American troops in American bases are flying drones in Afghanistan or Iraq or at least used to and they’re using really a video game controller often times actually model them off them and they’re watching on a screen a war you know you go in for your 9 to5 job and
You’re fighting a war and after you’re done controlling these drones you go home to your family and sit down at the dinner table and it’s it’s a weird kind of lack of separation between the battlefield and the home front and for a lot of troops that’s created all also a
Very complicated situation uh one that I think we haven’t yet really seen the full effects of because it’s such a new situation for us to have and again that ties into the issues of PTSD of being able to separate separate let’s say a war from home and and onward but for
Robots and Ai and remember a machine controlled by AI is a robot uh you are dealing with essentially the complete dehumanization of War now opening the door to allowing AI to kill humans is a very difficult door to close and again once you begin doing it and your enemies
Begin doing it that will very quickly become the main the main face of War because anything other than that will not be able to compete and it raises many other concerns with AI as well such as you know how will AI develop for example uh we don’t yet know where it’s
Going to head if you think about how long these types of technologies have been fully available available to the public you like these chat GPT and stuff it’s only been not that long of a period of time and already we’ve seen how much it’s developed already we’ve seen how much is
It’s how much it has changed we’re at the very beginning of this and it’s developing extremely quickly and I should not as well this is not this is not just going to be in my opinion a military issue issue this is going to become a terrorism issue this is going
To become a militia issue it’s going to become an issue where people without necessarily huge budgets are going to very soon well actually you can already although I I do not recommend it by the way uh the technolog is very easy to to build though people who can create
Really turrets sentry guns uh very easily again just by using even their cell phones in basic Ai and simple contra options in order to create these guns uh this is becoming the future unfortunately now that being said speaking about the future and dystopians uh there’s a new secret
Surveillance program and it turns out authorities were tracking Americans phone records Now new findings are emerging on systems that were being used to spy on Americans I know we hear things like this all the time and we’re kind of getting numb to it but don’t get
Numb to it this is a violation of your constitutional rights on illegal searches and seizures and the moment you start accepting that that’s going to become the norm now one of the latest of these is a Dragnet surveillance program that was tracking people’s phone records
For over a decade now I should not as well you know judge it based on you know whatever whatever you would like uh I personally believe this would constitute constitute a violation of the Constitution again against against illegal searches and seizures the government cannot just wiretap innocent people uh but unfortunately we’ve
Allowed these types of we we’ve allowed this type of spying to become the norm here’s why explaining the new one it says this a little known surveillance program tracks more than a trillion domestic phone records within the United States each year according to a letter wired obtained Wired Magazine that was
Sent by us Senator Ron widen to the Department of Justice on Sunday challenging the program’s legitimacy explains this he says says according to the letter a surveillance program now known as data analytical Services Das sounds very benign but it says here that this has for more than a decade allowed
Federal state and local law enforcement agencies to mine the details of Americans calls analyze the phone records of countless people who are not suspected of any crime including victims using a technique known as chain analysis it says the program targets not only those in direct phone contact with
The criminal suspect but anyone with whom those individuals have been in contact with as well now that could mean for example that you have a a cousin or an uncle who whose lifestyle you do not agree with and you’re not involved with it you don’t even want to know about it maybe you’ve
Tried talking to him a few times say you know I hope you get on the right track in life and you have a phone call with him you know talking to about that it means that because you have that phone call with him you are then within that
Chain of analytics meaning you are now swept up within that system and if you understand you know they used to talk about what was it seven degrees of separation or something like that that every single person on earth is connected to the next within a few degrees of separation how many degrees of
Separation you’re going to have before essentially you cover the entire country or most of the world you know we talk about Degrees of Separation based on the entire Earth how many is it if you just go by one single country at least in my opinion this is a loophole that is
Allowed for sweeping public surveillance it means basically that almost everybody can be surveilled and if you understand as well the nature of weaponized Justice and expansion of the justice system what then constitutes a criminal what what then constitutes a suspect what then constitutes somebody who’s been labeled
As an extremist or whatever else they’ve broaden these terms so much and in my opinion going against people who probably haven’t done anything while allowing actual criminals to just run Scott free uh you do have the issue as well that this could be very easily become a tool for political targeting we
Do know of similar things like this section 702 of the um of fisa um and of course that was one of the ways that they were spying on Trump for example we know of many other systems like this cesa for example and when you take the whole picture into
Account there is a massive public surveillance system that can monitor just about any kind of digital activity whatever it is now back to this Das program formerly known as hemisphere it’s run in coordination with the Telecom giant AT&T at least according to W which captures and conducts analysis of us call records
For law enforcement agencies now you could argue that uh law enforcement could could say that these are not necessarily your private records You could argue that the constitution protects you from illegal searches and seizures but what happens when your personal records are the property of a privately held business or even a public
Private partnership and you as an individual a customer of that service have agreed to the terms of services where you have given them permission to keep your data track your data record your data and use it for analytics or whatever the heck they want can that property then be obtained by
The government through a partnership well that’s how it works it’s again another chapter in the in the censorship by proxy in this case surveillance by proxy network if you understand the amount of data that for example social media sites collect on you if you ever read the terms of services you might
Agree for example to align them access to your phone your camera on your phone access to your microphone uh which can even record when your phone is not on by the way in many cases it means you’re giving them access to your search history access to analytics on your
Political views analytics on your interests analytics on your behavior who are your friends who are your family your entire social network everything you enjoy doing and often times even what you type in chat meaning every everything you communicate everything you look at everything you do online or around a device connected to the
Internet can then be collected by privately private private companies uh which you have personally granted permission to and I know I know I don’t read all those terms of service agreements I don’t think many people do but as soon as you check check that I agree box often times you were then
Behold into whatever crazy crazy programs or crazy access you have allowed them to get and some of them have really wild forms of access even including biometric data facial analytics and other things like that and for law enforcement You could argue well it’s very useful if if someone is
Arrested and police for example want to look and see what the person’s doing online they can find their Google search history which actually is used as evidence in court now to incriminate people you can look at their text messages even for Lial lawsuits if you defame somebody or something they can
Request records of your text messages to find whether you’ve typed chats to friends and in those chats you’ve revealed for example a bias against the individual or something else showing intent um all this information everything we do on the Internet is used then as evidence against you or in some
Cases maybe in your defense although I’d say it’s more likely to be used against you and it has created a system of really just massive surveillance being provided by private companies to every agency of law enforcement fed federal state and local now also in addition to this apparently madna you know the vaccine
Company was also monitoring people for for antivaccine views let me show you this in New York Times or New York Post has it it says madna had hired a former FBI agent to compile internal company reports about high-risk celebrities including tennis star Novak jakovic Tech Mogul Elon Musk actor
Russell Brand who’s being of course targeted and attacked right now who have been publicly critical of vaccine mandate according to a report it says the boston-based pharmaceutical company again madna which marketed one of the first mRNA vaccines against covid-19 that was distributed to tens of millions of Americans during the Corona virus
Pandemic is said to be employing a team of former law enforcement officials who make up a disinformation department that keeps track of antivaccine sentiment now look you could also let me give both sides on this you could argue this is a case of a company monitoring for public criticism of its
Product most companies these days have forms of marketing analysis which also pay attention to criticism or rumors most companies for example will pay attention to what the markets are saying if you release a product let’s say You release a product and people like it hey
You know you do more of it and if if you release a product and people hate it well you’re typically going to go find what they hate about it so you can improve it this goes a step further though because this is individuals criticizing a product and in some cases
These companies want to see well is it valid criticism is it fake criticism are these individuals making false statements could we sue them for liel or whatever else that’s also part of the anal is but with madna this actually goes a little bit further with madna it’s not
Just limited to that type of public relations let me show you this same link same same New York Post article it says reports that are deemed to be problematic are given colorcoded levels of R colorcoded levels ranging from low risk to high risk Fang and pulson reported it says a lowrisk item usually
Is usually worth one monitoring uh though they don’t currently warrant any action while higher risk bulletins would prompt quote our team to notify the appropriate stakeholders with recommendations according to the report it seems to be the case and again we’ll see if this ever gets uh SE if there’s
Lawsuits on this which I think is actually very possible that these companies themselves have been providing recommendations on censorship and we do know that the federal government had operations like this we do know that the vacine companies at least had some interest in it and we’re making of course public
Statements we know we know that American Health authorities even International Health authorities social media sites were carrying out operations all in sync with each other on this and it goes back again to the public private partnership that bypasses the constitution by again allows the government to bypass the Constitution and protections of your
Rights by aligning themselves with businesses which they can use as the tools to do what they cannot legally do now back to madna this could go beyond just public relations in other words it does raise some questions on whether this monitoring and you know feedback system was also informing the many
Systems of online censorship that is going to be one of the big questions needs to be answered on this now that folks that’s it for YouTube Facebook Twitter for the rest of this episode come and join me on Epic TV Link in the description below this video
I’ll be talking about how the United Nations right now is advancing the agenda against meat also let me know your thoughts on whether or not you think the Pentagon should let AI weapons choose to kill humans you can send me an email at Crossroads at Epic times.com EO
C tes.com I want to hear your thoughts on the AI debate and with that let’s jump over to Epic TV epoc tv.com and I’ll see you there for the rest of the episode
