The next big Privacy issue? Probably not.

https://www.cpomagazine.com/data-privacy/as-amazon-ring-partners-with-law-enforcement-on-surveillance-video-privacy-concerns-mount/

As Amazon Ring Partners With Law Enforcement on Surveillance Video, Privacy Concerns Mount

While Amazon takes special care to position its Ring video doorbell product as a friendly, high-tech version of the traditional “neighborhood watch,” U.S. lawmakers and privacy advocates are becoming increasingly skeptical. As they see it, Amazon Ring is putting into place few if any safeguards to protect personal privacy and civil rights. Now that Amazon Ring is partnering with hundreds of law enforcement and police agencies around the nation to share surveillance video, these privacy concerns are only mounting.

… Currently, at least 630 police departments around the nation have some form of partnership agreement in place with Amazon Ring. That number is up significantly by more than 200 since August, and Amazon Ring appears to be on a massive outreach program to get even more police departments to sign on to its surveillance video partnerships.

According to the basic type of agreement with law enforcement agencies, police can keep and share surveillance videos with anyone they want, even if there is no evidence of a crime that has taken place.

… Amazon Ring has put into place some privacy and civil liberties safeguards. For example, owners of Ring video doorbells are under no obligation to provide surveillance video, even when requested or suggested. And Amazon Ring specifically protects the identity of Ring video doorbell owners, such that local police departments cannot “retaliate” against anyone who refuses a surveillance video request. [“I see you have a Ring doorbell, citizen. Why not voluntarily give me the video?” Bob]

Without access to the same sources the author had, Facebook must rely on the State to tell it what is truth and what is fake. How 1984-ish...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-fakenews/singapore-tells-facebook-to-correct-users-post-in-test-of-fake-news-laws-idUSKBN1Y3093

Singapore tells Facebook to correct user's post in test of 'fake news' laws

Singapore instructed Facebook on Friday to publish a correction on a user’s social media post under a new “fake news” law, raising fresh questions about how the company will adhere to government requests to regulate content.

The government said in a statement that it had issued an order requiring Facebook “to publish a correction notice” on a Nov. 23 post which contained accusations about the arrest of a supposed whistleblower and election rigging.

Singapore said the allegations were “false” and “scurrilous” and initially ordered user Alex Tan, who runs the States Times Review blog, to issue the correction notice on the post. Tan, who does not live in Singapore and says he is an Australian citizen, refused and authorities said he is now under investigation.

… Facebook often blocks content that governments allege violate local laws, with nearly 18,000 cases globally in the year to June, according to the company’s “transparency report.”

But the new Singapore law is the first to demand that Facebook publish corrections when directed to do so by the government, and it remains unclear how Facebook plans to respond to the order.

The case is the first big test for a law that was two years in the making and came into effect last month.

(Related) You have to do this thousands of times each hour.

This is how Facebook’s AI looks for bad stuff

The context: The vast majority of Facebook’s moderation is now done automatically by the company’s machine-learning systems, reducing the amount of harrowing content its moderators have to review. In its latest community standards enforcement report, published earlier this month, the company claimed that 98% of terrorist videos and photos are removed before anyone has the chance to see them, let alone report them.

… Facebook’s AI uses two main approaches to look for dangerous content. One is to employ neural networks that look for features and behaviors of known objects and label them with varying percentages of confidence (as we can see in the video above).

… If the system decides that a video file contains problematic images or behavior, it can remove it automatically or send it to a human content reviewer. If it breaks the rules, Facebook can then create a hash—a unique string of numbers—to denote it and propagate that throughout the system so that other matching content will be automatically deleted if someone tries to re-upload it. These hashes can be shared with other social-media firms so they can also take down copies of the offending file.

… Facebook is still struggling to automate its understanding of the meaning, nuance, and context of language. That’s why the company relies on people to report the overwhelming majority of bullying and harassment posts that break its rules: just 16% of these posts are identified by its automated systems

The Russians are doing it again. (Whatever “it” is)