This & That

Trump on Possible Misuse of AI: “It’s the First Question I asked” … “It Could Be the Rabbit that Gets Away”

I’m not feeling any better about it, you guys know EXACTLY WHY. However, it’s good to know that President Trump is at least concerned about the potential runaway process within automated Artificial Intelligence.

During an interesting interview aboard Air-Force-One on the return from Las Vegas, President Trump was asked whether he was concerned about “artificial super intelligence” or fully automated AI.  President Trump said it was the first question he asked the AI team (Musk, Sacks, presumably Ellison and Altman).  Trump expressing the concern that it could be, “the rabbit that got away.”

The entire interview is loaded with some really interesting topics and insight; however, the AI comments come at 12:42 (prompted):

.

I also want to remind everyone that a DHS memo was issued on August 8th, 2023, discussing using AI as a tool for the domestic surveillance of American Citizens.

DHS’ AI task force is coordinating with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency on how the department can partner with critical infrastructure organizations “on safeguarding their uses of AI and strengthening their cybersecurity practices writ large to defend against evolving threats.”

What are those critical infrastructure organizations?  They include voting systems.  Who or what are those evolving threats?  You!

[SOURCE]

Take out the word “improper” and the admission is, DHS uses AI to profile, target and discriminate. In the second sentence, DHS currently participates in systemic, indiscriminate and/or large-scale monitoring, surveillance, or tracking of individuals. The only thing those sentences in the paragraph say, is that DHS will not allow AI to create improper outcomes within a system they outline that already exists.

Stop and reread that last sentence as much as needed.

Inasmuch as this DHS guidance is telling us the rules for Homeland Security (DHS) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) as they use AI, they are also outlining what current processes of surveillance would be enhanced by it.

The surveillance state comes from the creation of the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) which is an entirely inward-looking agency. Prior to the Patriot Act, the surveillance sweep searching for terror threats focused outward, looking outside the U.S borders. The Patriot Act took the surveillance sweep a full 360 degrees and looked inside the Homeland for terror threats. Hence, DHS was created.

The office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was also created by the Patriot Act, and was specifically created as the pivot point to combine the surveillance sweeps. The Pentagon and CIA intel agencies sweeping outside the U.S. and the DHS sweeping inside the U.S.

It was the creation of The Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) that destroyed what remained of privacy protections within the constitution (4th amendment). Americans are no longer secure in their ‘papers and effects’, nor protected by the ‘probable cause’ need for warrants. The erosion of the 4th amendment was absolutely connected to the creation of DHS; there is zero doubt about this cause and effect.

With the ODNI and DHS created, the sub-silos of the surveillance state then began. The Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) is one agency within the Dept of Homeland Security that was an outcome. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) also gained massive tools within this new system.

The key point behind all of this context is what I refer to as the ‘Surveillance State.’ American citizens have lost all privacy protections within this new system of surveillance, that has extended far beyond even what most people fathom.

When you understand the root origin of the Surveillance State, then the discussion turns to what we have accepted within its creation, and what is the current status of American Liberty as an outcome of it.

The fact that this system was weaponized by Barack Obama and Joe Biden to target their political opposition is only one aspect of this dynamic. Yes, it is a big issue, and yes what they did was horrific, corrupt and in my opinion unlawful. However, their ability to weaponize this system only existed because the domestic surveillance state was created and authorized by the legislative branch of government.

Now we are left arguing about who controls a system that should never have been authorized.

All of President Trump’s cabinet and key appointments carry the same outlook toward the surveillance state. They fundamentally believe the system is needed, the DHS system holds national security value, and the capacity within the DHS system is only a problem when corrupt political operatives are in charge of it. If good, virtuous and moral people are in charge, the DHS surveillance system is okay.

To be clear and fair to readers, I disagree with the Trump administrations’ foundational perspective of the Surveillance State. I do not believe the system holds greater benefit than it does cost. However, that is not the primary reasoning for my opposing viewpoints.

There are two larger issues within this surveillance state. The first, is the potential weaponization of it; this is a simple matter of accepting the historic reality of it. The second issue is an issue that will surface quickly in the next few years, just as rapidly as the advances in technology that support it.

There are going to be tiers of people who are not subjected to the rules of the Surveillance State. There are going to be tiers of people, powerful, influential, some intensely rich people, to whom the application of the surveillance does not exist.

Inside the surveillance system, supported by the policy team behind President Trump, there will be classes of people. Just as we defined “essential workers” within the COVID-19 pandemic. This essential group will be classed based on their administrative value to the government operators who control the mechanics of outcomes; perhaps “essential administrators.” This is a natural outcome of the mindset behind “continuity of government,” the baseline for the Patriot Act creation.

The tools created by Palantir et al, are multifunctional. They can be used by the Pentagon and CIA for military application, and they can be used by DNI, DHS, FBI and TSA for domestic application. Just as the Patriot Act redefined “terror threats” to begin sweeping 360 degrees, so too are the tools of the surveillance state designed for both foreign and domestic application.

There is no way to avoid being the target of a weapon once that weapon is created. However, unlike the mutually assured destruction within the nuclear analogy, there will be no threat of mutual application within the surveillance bomb.

I am optimistic President Trump will eventually support our liberty position; in fact, I do not question that at all.  However, we must accept the consequence of that moment happening, and the non-alignment in principle being quite likely going to make the technocratic MAGA billionaires shift from allies to adversaries.

Peaceniks don’t build bombs; and those who genuinely believe in liberty [looking at you Thiel] do not build or support domestic surveillance networks that can be weaponized depending on who is in power.