Academic Pushing for Global Surveillance Government By James Reed

     It is the usual; an academic saying the right things that the establishment wants. Can any of them ever oppose anything? They are so predictable, embracing globalism, always, even the analytic logical types. The philosopher in question is Oxford’s Nick Bostrom, who once wrote a famous paper arguing that the universe could be a computer simulation. Now he really gets weird:
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-25/global-government-and-mass-surveillance-needed-save-humanity-expert-says

“Last Wednesday, Bostrom took the stage at a TED conference in Vancouver, Canada, to share some of the insights from his latest work, “The Vulnerable World Hypothesis.” While speaking to head of the conference, Chris Anderson, Bostrom argued that mass surveillance could be one of the only ways to save humanity – from a technology of our own creation. His theory starts with a metaphor of humans standing in front of a giant urn filled with balls that represent ideas. There are white balls (beneficial ideas), grey balls (moderately harmful ideas), and black balls (ideas that destroy civilization). The creation of the atomic bomb, for instance, was akin to a grey ball — a dangerous idea that didn’t result in our demise. Bostrom posits that there may be only one black ball in the urn, but, once it is selected, it cannot be put back. (Humanity would be annihilated, after all.) According to Bostrom, the only reason that we haven’t selected a black ball yet is because we’ve been “lucky.” (source) In his paper, Bostrom writes, If scientific and technological research continues, we will eventually reach it and pull it out. Our civilization has a considerable ability to pick up balls, but no ability to put them back into the urn. We can invent but we cannot un-invent. Our strategy is to hope that there is no black ball.

***
If technological development continues then a set of capabilities will at some point be attained that make the devastation of civilization extremely likely, unless civilization sufficiently exits the semi-anarchic default condition. (source) Bostrom believes the only thing that can save humanity is government. Bostrom has proposed ways to prevent this from happening, and his ideas are horrifyingly dystopian: The first would require stronger global governance which goes further than the current international system.This would enable states to agree to outlaw the use of the technology quickly enough to avert total catastrophe, because the international community could move faster than it has been able to in the past. Bostrom suggests in his paper that such a government could also retain nuclear weapons to protect against an outbreak or serious breach. The second system is more dystopian, and would require significantly more surveillance than humans are used to. Bostrom describes a kind of “freedom tag,” fitted to everyone that transmits encrypted audio and video that spots signs of undesirable behavior. This would be necessary, he argues, future governance systems to preemptively intervene before a potentially history-altering crime is committed. The paper notes that if every tag cost $140, it would cost less than one percent of global gross domestic product to fit everyone with the tag and potentially avoid a species-ending event. These tags would feed information to “patriot monitoring stations,” or “freedom centers,” where artificial intelligence would monitor the data, bringing human “freedom officers” into the loop if signs of a black ball are detected.”

     This well illustrates why we should fear academics, because of the lack of common sense. Why should a world government be a force for good rather than evil? No reason at all, and it is more likely that centralised power will corrupt, or even be subjected to faults and random effects leading to disaster, as we get a taste of with developments such as this one:
  https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-04-25-microsoft-colluding-with-communist-chinese-military-to-build-ai-systems.html

“Microsoft has been working with a Chinese military-run university on researching artificial intelligence that could be used for censorship and surveillance, according to a shocking new report from Financial Times. A series of scientific studies were co-authored by researchers from Microsoft Research Asia and scientists associated with China’s National University of Defense Technology (NUDT). This apparent relationship between Microsoft and a Chinese military university is now giving rise to a tidal wave of concerns. A number of experts have spoken out about the potential risks of U.S.-China academic relations, but there are also serious red flags about the artificial intelligence (AI) that Microsoft and the Chinese were working to develop. The research points to widespread surveillance and censorship, and people across the tech industry and from around the political spectrum are outraged over Microsoft’s role in enabling the Chinese government’s oppression of its citizens.

Microsoft and communist China research AI censorship
Microsoft and the Chinese military-run university NUDT have joined forces to work on research for AI that could be used for nefarious purposes. A trio of recently published papers have revealed their silent partnership for all the world to see. One paper explores a new AI technique for recreating elaborate environmental maps through the surveying of human faces. Breitbart reports that experts caution such technology will have immediate use in the surveillance arena. Samm Sacks, senior fellow at the New America think tank and China tech expert, says that these papers raise “red flags because of the nature of the technology, the author affiliations, combined with what we know about how this technology is being deployed in China right now.” “The [Chinese] government is using these technologies to build surveillance systems and to detain minorities [in Xinjiang],” she reportedly added.  And we all know what happens to people who get blacklisted in China. Threats, attacks and disappearances are all far too common among communist China’s dissidents. Other papers published by Microsoft and NUDT focused on machine learning. Experts say that while this area of tech may not sound “concerning,” machine learning could be key for the Chinese government to engage in censorship at scale. Microsoft’s joint research efforts with the NUDT will undoubtedly serve the Chinese government’s goals to have complete dominion over its people.

Microsoft under fire
A number of U.S. legislators have called out Microsoft’s partnership with China. Sen. Marco Rubio recently described it as “deeply disturbing,” and said it was “an act that makes them complicit” in China’s abuse of human rights. Microsoft has defended their abhorrent partnership with NUDT, declaring that their partnership with Chinese military has helped them to “advance our understanding of technology.” The company states further that it is important for their scientists to work with experts from around the world to continue advancing forward. “In each case, the research is guided by our principles, fully complies with U.S. and local laws, and the research is published to ensure transparency so that everyone can benefit from our work,” Microsoft’s statement said further. But experts say that the technologies Microsoft has helped NUDT research can easily be used for unsavory purposes, such as censorship and targeted surveillance. According to Business Insider, Chinese authorities are already using the facial recognition software to track and detain over one million Muslim minorities. Anyone who dares to act or speak against the communist regime also faces detainment. Microsoft is not the first company to bend the knee to communist China. Google recently came under fire for “blacklisting” a political dissident at the behest of the Chinese government. Apple has also faced scrutiny for allowing the foreign regime to dictate what apps are available or banned from the app store. Across the board, it seems that Big Tech has no problem with colluding with a government seeking to violate its citizen’s natural rights — and it’s not just happening in China.”

     Contrary to Bostrom, the Chinese are not going to fall in line with his globalist tech fantasy. Academics need to step outside of their ivory cesspools, and see what is really happening in the world. Then we close these places down and put the academics on the dole or offer them work on the roads with a pick and shovel. Analyse that!

Authorised by K. W. Grundy
13 Carsten Court, Happy Valley, SA.