Who gave your AI the right to monitor me?
This is a Swedish-language column from CS Veckobrev, the newsletter of editor-in-chief Marcus Jerräng, about how AI and surveillance are converging. It starts from Norway's announcement that it intends to introduce a temporary ban on AI glasses in public places such as parks, beaches, schools, playgrounds and gyms. Digitalisation minister Torgeir Micaelsen said the fear of being filmed, photographed or recorded without knowing it could create an unsafe society where people withdraw. The trigger is Meta's AI glasses, the first smart glasses to reach a mass market, which have been nicknamed "creep glasses" because they are often used to secretly film people, mostly women. Apps now warn wearers' neighbours, France is investigating cases of sexual harassment, the Netherlands' largest optician chain has stopped selling them, and the European Data Protection Board is expected to publish guidelines in the autumn. Wired reported that Meta quietly added facial recognition code to the glasses' app and withdrew it days later.
The author sees this as part of a wider trend. In the US, the network of Flock's AI cameras that read licence plates is growing, and Amazon had to back away from linking its Ring doorbells to it. Swedish police are testing AI facial recognition under a new law. A newer "micro-level" surveillance comes from personal AI agents, which work best when they know everything about you and the people around you. Wired revealed that Meta's agent Muse, a hit in US app charts but not available in Europe, builds detailed profiles of users' family, friends and colleagues, including conflicts and conversation topics. Meta says users must approve this, but it is unclear how the friends consent. Apple's new "Audio Intelligence" features on Apple Watch, such as Siri Recap and Live Rewind, require an always-on microphone, though Apple stresses that no audio is recorded and bystanders are not identified.
The author argues that people tolerate surveillance when they get something in return, from companies or from police. The new category is different, because one person's tech choices affect others who never agreed. GDPR limits the worst excesses in Europe, but companies will keep trying. The author asks whether a private panopticon should be built alongside the state's potential one, and warns of public spaces becoming less public and private relationships less private.