'Surveillance Capitalism'
Questions and (maybe) a few answers
A Very Happy 2024, everyone.
Here in Uxbridge, the snow is flying at last (about six inches on the ground since dinner time). El Niño seems to be losing his grip, and now that 2023, El Año más Estraño, is well and truly behind us, I must follow up on my earlier post ‘Predatory Capitalism and the Invisible Environment.’ On Wednesday this week (January 10th), I made a presentation to the Works Committee at Durham Region (details below). The surveillance technology being installed in and around Uxbridge, it turns out, was situated on ‘Regional’ roads, so not actually the Town’s jurisdiction; and thus, a trip to the Region was called for.
Before get into this though, I should mention that delegations of this kind became something of a trend in 2023, in an effort to win back our towns (our countries, no less) from the external influences that (we are told) have ‘penetrated’ the government of Canada (and others nation around the world) at every level.
Through our collective efforts, we appear to be making progress. Although there’s no connection of course, it was good to hear this past week, that the UN temporarily (for now) shut down its HQ in Geneva: www.brusselstimes.com/863803/un-temporarily-closes-geneva-headquarters-due-to-lack-of-funds
Coincidentally, I’d intended to use this image with the ‘Geneva’ reference in my previous Substack, so I’m happy to have an excuse to include it here. This is a whole other story of course, but the building you see on the left is just one of the many UN offices (that I couldn’t resist snapping a picture of when I was there in 2005). Could it be that the Nation States funding the UN are realizing that this organization has been working against their best interests as well? Our current Prime Minister’s statement, about being the proud leader of the world’s ‘first postnational state’ has not been forgotten. On this note, the Canadian Petition to Exit the UN (and WHO) has now crossed the 80,000 mark. If nothing else, please share this link to everyone.
To get back on track though, on Tuesday, Jan 10th, Gather 2030 share the following:
I was happy to attend this meeting, and many like it over the course of 2023, before jumping back in myself. My own first deputation was at a Town Council meeting in 2000, regarding the proposed ‘Gan Eden’ housing development in the heart of the Uxbridge Green Belt (which, happily, was prevented from moving forward). Since then, like almost everyone else apparently, I barely set foot in my Town Hall (except to pay my property taxes and attend the occasional art show).
All this changed though, starting with deputations made by Tish Conlin (Port Perry, Clarington and Durham Region, and John Petejan in East Gwillimbury), then Maggie Braun, John Dunn, Joel and Margaret Sussmann, which together have evolved into something of a movement. Joel’s presentation recently had a quarter-million views on X. Across Canada, from Vancouver and Creston, BC., to Yarmouth, NS. (in the US and UK too) residents are standing up and speaking out, as they resist the United Nations’ influence in their Towns and Regions; which began, as you will read, with the so-called ‘Municipal Primer,’ way back in 1994.
This is the most grassroots of movements, still in its early days, but it is growing quickly. I’ve been reading about ICLEI and UNDRIP for the past couple years, but avoided going too far down the UN rabbit hole – until now. I applaud those who took this challenge on early, and led the charge.
I’ve had my own ‘focus’ of course, which (as you’ll gather from my Substack) is related more to economics and technology, but all of these things are interconnected. I couldn’t resist mentioning the Municipal Primer therefore (and the problem this presents today), in the last few seconds of my presentation on Wednesday. My longstanding interest in monetary and economic issues, began to expand in 2019, when I picked up a copy of Common Ground in Victoria, BC.
I then read, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, by Shoshana Zuboff, and shortly after that, The Fourth Industrial Revolution. As the sheer ingenuity of this technocratic plan sank in — the Technocrats have been scheming since the 1920s of course, waiting patiently for technology to catch up with their plans for absolute control — the lockdowns happened, and it was Game On. Since then, I’ve been able to think of little else, as you can probably tell.
So that’s enough of a ‘primer.’ Before I hit the limits with this latest post as well, let me share my January 10th Region (Works Committee) presentation:
“Happy New Year, Mr. Mayor, Committee members.”
Thank you for allowing me this time to follow up on my Oct 23rd presentation to the Uxbridge Town Council — for providing answers the Uxbridge Council members couldn't, and for acknowledging the additional concerns I bring to you today. As mentioned in the documents I sent earlier (with respect to all surveillance equipment, and speed cameras in particular), the residents of Durham require answers to the following questions:
What information is being collected?
What third party players have access to this information?
Is the information being monetized?
Is AI facial recognition (or any AI) being employed?
Are license plates being recorded (by traffic surveillance cameras)?
Is other information, such as emissions, being collected (through SMART street lights or other technologies)?
Also (as mentioned) the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, François-Philippe Champagne, announced (just four months ago, in Sept 2023) a ‘Voluntary Code of Conduct on the Responsible Development and Management of Advanced Generative AI Systems.’
1 min
It falls to the Region and local municipalities, therefore — where this technology is appearing 'on the ground' — to introduce a local ‘digital charter,’ based on the one proposed by Dr. Leslyn Lewis, to protect our privacy. First, we would like to know what is the stance the Region, with respect to data gathered as a result of the ‘SMART City’ and ‘Intelligent Community’ projects, and what code of ethics have any third-parties the Region may have contracted with, presented to you?
There is no ‘informed consent’ from the residents of region when it comes to this kind of information gathering (particularly since AI is capable of facial recognition), so there should be no more gathering of information (of this nature) and no further sharing of data with third-parties until an agreement is reached with the people of the Region. No government has the right to monitor the movements of residents within their communities, and no one has the right to profit from this information, particularly when our tax dollars are being used to pay for the data collecting infrastructure (which brings me back to those earlier questions).
2 mins
You will all be familiar with the term ‘Surveillance Capitalism,’ and, more famously, The Fourth Industrial Revolution - The World Economic Forum's 2016 publication penned by Klaus Schwab. If you are not familiar with this material, it is required reading...
Many of your jobs too can be made obsolete by the implementation of AI (p151 ‘AI and White-Collar Jobs’), so we hope you will be inclined to take this issue as seriously as we do. This will entail further discussions, of course, and I would suggest – until we have a charter to protect all of us from the negative impact of this technology – a moratorium on the use of AI and surveillance undertaken in partnership with third-parties (especially the corporate stakeholders profiting from supplying surveillance technology, or from the data they are extracting). This brings me to the questions:
Who profits from fines issued by speed cameras?
What profit sharing sharing arrangements, if any, have been made?
3 mins
Although the 'Intelligent Community' outlined paints a rosy picture of Durham as a high-tech innovation centre, how much high-tech revenue has been attracted here in comparison to the cost of tech infrastructure and services purchased elsewhere? It seems, in the case of CityROVER, Redflex and Vera Mobility, for instance, that deals are done behind closed doors and resident's tax dollars are appropriated for ‘services’ they would likely not approve of otherwise. Instead, we see sales-pitch-like opinion pieces (after the fact) such as 'How the Region is Using AI to Make Your Drive Smoother.'
At my last presentation, I was labelled a ‘Conspiracy theorist’ for talking about such things, but I will refer you again to Dr. Leslyn Lewis, and her recent presentation called: ‘The Truth About Smart Cities.’ Citizens are concerned, not only about what they're not being told, but the costs for the installation of this technology. Rather than being good for business in Durham, it seems corporate stakeholders in other Regions and Countries are profiting handsomely, at our expense.
4 mins
I will take my last minute (before your question) to talk about increasing concerns over Electromagnetic Frequency and Radio Frequency pollution in the high density SMART districts that are now being constructed. The recent Ramazzini Study (as you'll see in the documents provided) is important because it confirms the results in the original National Toxicology Program study, which shows clearly that Radio Frequency does present a serious health concern. In light of this new evidence, our elected representatives must demonstrate to residents of Durham that they do actually have our best interests at heart, by halting further implementation of connected infrastructure (5G and SMART street lights, most notably) until the WHO, the FCC and Health Canada revise their inadequate safety standards.
Recently, as you may be aware, there have been question about the fact that elected representatives no longer swear an Oath to the people who elected them. Instead (some time after the United Nation's 1994 ‘Municipal Primer’ was circulated) a ‘Declarations of Office’ now appear to commit our public trustees to represent the interests of the ‘Corporation of the Town - Township or Region’ and (by default) the corporate stakeholders the Region is contracting with. . .
5 mins
The clock is unforgiving, and five minutes is not nearly enough time to present all of the ideas and background (questions and suggestions) that must be presented. We do what can though, to get this material on the record (and in the minutes), and we hope that our message will go out into the world (circulated as widely as our friend Joel’s presentation did) encouraging still more people to get involved — with all levels of government. If we are to have a government for the people, it really must be a government of the people — not of de facto UN technocrats.
Returning to Maggie’s (and Gene’s) ‘Advice on Council Deputations,’ I must add, always remember to have a bottle of water on hand — although the time passes so quickly you’ll feel you can’t spare a second to actually take a drink. To see the archived video, please visit the following page and scroll down to the 6th frame (for the moment). ‘Works Committee Meetings’: www.durham.video
Other links and documents were provided with the material submitted ahead of time but I’ll not include any more here, since I’ll have to post a follow up when Council responds (as stated, about 8 minutes in) with “details on our ASE system. . .” (‘Automated Speed Enforcement,’ that is). I’m certain I’ll have to return for more information, and answers to other questions, but this is a start at least, and I look forward to sharing more soon.
Thank you again for your interest, comments and emails, and for your support (in whatever form that takes).
David
So appreciate you David!