Police and federal agencies have found a controversial new way to skirt the growing patchwork of laws that curb how they use facial recognition: an AI model that can track people based on attributes like body size, gender, hair color and style, clothing, and accessories. The tool, called Track and built by the video analytics company Veritone, is used by 400 customers, including state and local police departments and universities all over the US. It is also expanding federally. The product has drawn criticism from the American Civil Liberties Union, which--after learning of the tool through MIT Technology Review--said it was the first instance they'd seen of a nonbiometric tracking system used at scale in the US. How the largest gathering of US police chiefs is talking about AI.

On the eve of The Olympics opening ceremony, Paris is a city swamped in security. Packs of police, wearing stab vests, patrol pretty cobbled streets. The river Seine is out of bounds to anyone who has not already been vetted and issued with a personal QR code. Khaki-clad soldiers, present since the 2015 terrorist attacks, linger near a canal-side boulangerie, wearing berets and clutching large guns to their chests. French interior minister Gérald Darmanin has spent the past week justifying these measures as vigilance--not overkill.

From algorithms firing staff without human intervention to software keeping tabs on bathroom breaks, technologies including artificial intelligence are already upsetting workers and unsettling workplaces. At call centers, AI systems record and grade how workers handle calls, often giving failing grades for not sticking to the script. Some corporate software spies on workers to see whether they ever write the word "union" in their emails. As technologies grow ever more sophisticated in monitoring, surveilling and speeding up workers, many workplace experts say US businesses, labor unions and government are not doing nearly enough to protect workers from tech's downsides. "Workers are being constantly monitored, and AI-based monitoring tools can make mistakes that can translate into unfair pay cuts or firings," said Virginia Doellgast, a professor of employment relations at Cornell.

"We've seen this before at previous Olympic Games like in Japan, Brazil and Greece. What were supposed to be special security arrangements for the special circumstances of the games, ended up being normalised," says Noémie Levain, of the digital rights campaign group La Quadrature du Net (Squaring the Web).

This month, French lawmakers are expected to pass legislation for the 2024 Paris Olympics, which, for the first time in France's history, will permit mass video surveillance powered by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. When governments embark on the slippery slope towards the expansion of surveillance powers, it has damning consequences for fundamental human rights, including the rights to privacy, equality and non-discrimination, as well as freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Under the guise of ensuring security and fighting terrorism, the French authorities will be able to monitor the movements of millions of people from around the world, whether they are heading to or near stadiums, or using public transportation leading in or out of the premises of the grand sporting event. The need for security during the game is understandable, but transparency and legal justification are needed at every step of the way. Any proposal concerning security must comply with fundamental rights.

AI surveillance is increasing at a rapid pace around the world. The East Asia/Pacific, Americas, and the Middle East/North Africa regions are robust adopters of these tools. Even liberal democracies in Europe have installed automated border controls, predictive policing, "safe cities", and facial recognition systems. China is the biggest supplier of these technologies which can be found in 63 countries. Huawei alone is responsible for providing AI surveillance technology to at least fifty countries and its leadership has strong ties with the Chinese government.

Artificial intelligence (AI)¹ has been rapidly growing worldwide, with new applications being discovered every day. While AI has applications across many sectors, one area where it is commonly utilized is in AI surveillance and facial recognition technology to combat crimes. As of 2019, at least seventy-five countries globally are actively using AI technologies for surveillance purposes, including smart city/safe city platforms, facial recognition systems, and smart policing initiatives (Feldstein 2019: 1). However, the widespread use of AI in the name of combating crimes does not come without a cost; multiple ethical concerns have arisen in the past couple of years, which questions the feasibility of implementing AI technology to combat crimes. This article will examine two prominent ethical concerns regarding AI in fighting crimes: biases in facial recognition technology and authoritarian governments exploiting AI surveillance in the name of public safety.

When it comes to human operators, there are chances of missed crucial security clues, subject to fatigue, leading to terrible outcomes for an organization. The advantage of AI for surveillance and the security ecosystem is that machines can always be trusted to be accurate, making up for human deficiencies. AI for surveillance and security ecosystem ensures that no detail, no information, and certainly no threat go undetected, which guarantees an organization's security. With having made strong waves across industries, including automotive, healthcare, entertainment, finance, manufacturing, and more, AI is now playing a pivotal role in real-time surveillance. This means that AI-driven cameras don't just keep an eye on public activities but also indulge in smart analysis.

Amazon is well-known for its technological Taylorism: using digital sensors to monitor and control the activity of its workers in the name of efficiency. But after installing machine learning-powered surveillance cameras in its delivery vans earlier this year, the company is now telling employees: agree to be surveilled by AI or lose your job. As first reported by Vice, Amazon delivery drivers in the US now have to sign "biometric consent" forms to continue working for the retailing giant. Exactly what information is being collected seems to vary based on what surveillance equipment has been installed in any given van, but Amazon's privacy policy (embedded below) covers a wide range of data. The data that drivers must consent to be collected includes photographs used to verify their identity; vehicle location and movements (including "miles driven, speed, acceleration, braking, turns, following distance"); "potential traffic violations" (like speeding, failure to stop at stop signs, and undone seatbelts); and "potentially risky driver behavior, such as distracted driving or drowsy driving."

Utah is putting its AI surveillance system on ice after learning of its creator's background. The state has suspended (via Salt Lake Tribune) Banjo's contract after learning from a OneZero report that company head Damien was part of the Dixie Knights of the Ku Klux Klan as a teenager and joined the racist group's leader in an anti-Semitic drive-by shooting. While Patton has expressed remorse for his past, according to Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes, officials were concerned enough that they felt it was safer to put an advisory committee and independent audit in place to tackle concerns like privacy and "possible bias." Banjo's deal with Utah lets it combine data from city infrastructure (such as public cameras and 911) with internet content to spot "anomalies," theoretically detecting some crimes as they happen. The firm is supposed to strip all personal data from the system, but the methods and effectiveness aren't clear.