When they are in Europe The Union Commission released its mempholo on the performance-making scale last month, many US people celebrated. Their praise may have been based on fact: The world’s most powerful democracies have not fully implemented AI and other available technologies, and the document points to something far more advanced. Especially, though mempholo and its responses confirm the distorted words of democracy on AI.
Over the past decade, high-level goals related to AI management have been at odds with the concept of improved systems, and the last countries should look like they haven’t been properly articulated in any way. The continuation of the system and the benefits of establishing democratic policies in AI around the world, although this can vary from country to country, starts with dealing with many conflicts and incomplete assumptions.
The EU Commission has changed the request as a framework for AI. Vice President Executive Margrethe Vestager He said “We think this is urgent. We’re the first in the world to say that,” said Thierry Breton, another commissioner. He said The idea “aims to strengthen European space as a global hub from lab to market, to ensure that AI in Europe respects our principles and policies, and to take advantage of industrial AI for use in the industry.”
This is better than most governments in the world, especially the US, which do not comply with traffic laws on companies, government agencies, and other organizations. AI is widely used in the EU even with minimal supervision and accountability, whether it is oversight in Athens or working buses in Málaga, Spain.
But to throw EU law into a “lead” because that is why first he just hides his thoughts on many things. This type of jump is one of the first challenges facing AI democracy.
In many “Special” in the 108-page concept, his approach to establishing facial recognition is very important. “The use of ‘AI’ s real-time ‘real-time’ information systems in public places to enforce the law,” it reads, “is seen as a serious violation of the rights and freedoms of the people concerned,” as it may affect private life, ” for the public to observe at all times, “and to” impede the freedom of the assembly and other fundamental rights. ” First of all, these words may indicate a connection with anxiety yes many encouraging and expertise ethical experts on traumatic facial injuries can bring people who live far away from the dangers of mass control.
“The use of machines for law enforcement should not be banned,” the council said. However, it may allow for variation “in three well-defined and unfamiliar areas.” This is where the opportunity begins.
Apart from that there are incidents that “involve the search for victims of abuse, including missing children; other threats to life or physical security of natural persons or threats; the so-called “little definition,” provides a number of reasons for enacting laws to recognize the face as they wish. their freedom had already been warned.
EU Information Officer, European Data Protection Supervisor, he quickly blew up on this. “A strong approach is needed to recognize that long-term biometric identification, in which AI contributes to unprecedented events, poses a serious threat to deep and unconstitutional interference in human lives,” the EDPS report said. Sarah Chander from the nonprofit organization European Digital Rights he explained an idea in Verge as a “false security precaution.” Some have seen how the legal distinction in the US that the surface seems to impede face recognition but also has many toys.