Surveillance systems are changing dramatically with the rapid introduction of artificial intelligence technologies at the societal level. Governments and tech giants are continuing to develop their artificial intelligence tools, promising greater security, reduced crime rates and combating disinformation. At the same time, these technologies are evolving in ways never seen before; and we are left with a very significant question: are we really willing to sacrifice our personal freedoms in exchange for security that may never come?
Indeed, given AI’s ability to monitor, predict and influence human behavior, the questions go far beyond improved efficiency. While the advertised benefits are increased public safety and improved services, I believe that the restriction of personal freedoms, loss of autonomy and democratic values is a solemn problem. It is worth considering whether the widespread operate of artificial intelligence does not signal a modern, subtle form of totalitarianism.
The imperceptible impact of AI surveillance
While AI is changing the face of industries such as retail, healthcare and security with insights previously considered unimaginable, it is impacting more sensitive domains related to predictive policing, facial recognition and social credit systems. While these systems promise greater security, they silently create a surveillance state that is imperceptible to most citizens until it is too overdue.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of AI-based surveillance is its ability not only to track our behavior, but also to learn from it. Predictive policing uses machine learning to analyze historical crime data and predict where future crimes may occur. However, a fundamental flaw is that it is based on biased data, often reflecting racial profiling, socioeconomic inequality and political bias. They are not only inflated, but also incorporated into artificial intelligence algorithms, which then negatively affect the situation, causing and deepening social inequalities. Moreover, individuals are reduced to data points, while losing context and humanity.
Academic insightt – Research has shown that predictive policing applications, such as those used by US law enforcement, have actually targeted marginalized communities. One study published in 2016 by ProPublica found that risk assessment instruments used in the criminal justice system often skewed the effectiveness of African Americans, predicting statistically higher rates of recidivism than would ultimately manifest.
Algorithmic Bias: A Threat to Integrity – The real threat of artificial intelligence in surveillance is its potential to amplify and perpetuate biased realities already enacted in society. Take the example of predictive policing tools that focus attention on neighborhoods already overwhelmed by the machinery of law. These systems “learn” from crime data, but much of that data is skewed by years of uneven policing practices. Similarly, AI hiring algorithms have been proven to favor male candidates over female candidates due to the male-dominated workforce whose data was used for training.
These biases don’t just influence individual decisions – they raise solemn ethical questions about responsibility. When AI systems make life-changing decisions based on faulty data, no one is responsible for the consequences of the wrong decision. A world in which algorithms increasingly make decisions about who gets access to jobs, loans and even the justice system is ripe for abuse if there is no clear view of its elements.
Scientific example – Research conducted at MIT’s Media Lab has shown how algorithmic hiring systems can replicate past forms of discrimination, exacerbating systemic inequalities. In particular, the hiring algorithms used by powerful tech companies overwhelmingly favor job candidate resumes that match their preferred demographic profile, which systematically leads to skewed recruiting outcomes.
Manager of thoughts and actions
Perhaps the most disturbing possibility is that AI surveillance could eventually be used not only to monitor physical activities but also to influence thoughts and behavior. Artificial intelligence is already becoming quite good at predicting our next moves, using hundreds of millions of data points based on our digital activity – everything from our social media presence to online shopping patterns and even our biometric data obtained from wearable devices. However, with more advanced AI, we run the risk of systems actively influencing human behavior in ways we are unaware of.
China’s social credit system presents a chilling vision of this future. Under this system, individuals are assessed based on their behavior – online and offline – and this score can, for example, influence access to loans, travel and job opportunities. While this all sounds like a dystopian nightmare, it’s already being developed in pieces around the world. If allowed to go down this path, the state or corporations could influence not only what we do, but also how we think, shaping our preferences and desires, and even beliefs.
In such a world, personal choice can be a luxury. Your choices – what you buy, where you go, who you associate with – can be mapped by imperceptible algorithms. Artificial intelligence would thus essentially end up as the architect of our behavior, a force pushing us into compliance and punishing deviation.
References to the study – Research on China’s social credit system includes research by the Center for the Study of Comparative Race and Ethnicity at Stanford University that shows the system can be an attack on privacy and freedom. Thus, a reward/punishment system associated with AI-based surveillance can manipulate behavior.
The surveillance feedback loop: Self-censorship and behavior change – AI-based surveillance creates a feedback loop in which the more we are observed, the more we change to avoid unwanted attention. This phenomenon, known as “surveillance self-censorship,” has an extremely chilling effect on free speech and can stifle dissent. As people become more aware that they are under close surveillance, they begin to self-regulate – they limit their contact with others, limit their speech, and even tame their thoughts to avoid attracting attention.
This is not a hypothetical problem restricted to an authoritarian regime; in a democratic society, tech companies justify mass data collection under the guise of “personalized experiences”, collecting user data to improve products and services. But if AI can predict consumer behavior, what’s to stop the same algorithms from being used again to shape public opinion or influence political decisions? If we are not careful, we may find ourselves trapped in a world where our behavior is dictated by algorithms programmed to maximize corporate profits or government control, thereby depriving us of the freedoms that define democratic societies.
Relevant literature – The phenomenon of surveillance-driven self-censorship was documented in a 2019 Oxford Internet Institute paper that examined the chilling effect of surveillance technology on public discourse. It turned out that people modify their behavior and interactions online for fear of the consequences of being watched.
Paradox: security at the expense of freedom
At the heart of the debate is a paradox: how can we protect society from crime, terrorism and disinformation, protecting it without sacrificing the freedoms that make democracy worth protecting? Does the promise of greater security justify the erosion of our privacy, autonomy and freedom of speech? If we willingly trade our rights for greater security, we risk turning into a world where the state or corporations have complete control over our lives.
While AI-based surveillance systems may offer the potential to improve security and efficiency, unchecked development could lead to a future where privacy is a luxury and freedom becomes a secondary concern. The challenge is not just about finding the right balance between security and privacy – it is about whether we feel comfortable with artificial intelligence dictating our choices, shaping our behavior and undermining the freedoms that underpin democratic life.
Research insights – Privacy vs. security: In one of its studies, the EFF found that the debate between the two is not purely theoretical; rather, governments and corporations are constantly pushing the boundaries of privacy, for which security becomes a convenient excuse for ubiquitous surveillance systems.
Balancing Act: Responsible Oversight – The way forward is, of course, not clear. On the one hand, these AI-based surveillance systems can assist guarantee public safety and efficiency in various sectors. On the other hand, these same systems pose solemn risks to our personal freedoms, transparency and accountability.
In tiny, the challenge is twofold: first, do we want to live in a society where technology has such enormous power over our lives. We must also call for a regulatory framework that protects rights while ensuring the proper operate of artificial intelligence. The European Union has indeed already started to tighten the noose on AI, imposing modern regulations focusing on transparency, accountability and fairness. We must ensure that such surveillance remains a tool that enhances the public good, without compromising the freedoms that make society worth protecting. Other governments and companies must follow suit and ensure this happens.
Conclusion: the price of “security” in the era of AI surveillance
As artificial intelligence increasingly enters our daily lives, the question that should haunt our collective imagination is: is the price of security worth the loss of our freedom? This question has always been relevant, but the advent of artificial intelligence has made this debate more urgent. The systems we build today will shape the society of tomorrow – one where security may blur under control and privacy may become a relic of the past.
We must decide whether we want artificial intelligence to lead us into a safer but ultimately more controlled future, or whether we will fight to preserve the freedoms that underpin our democracies.
About the author