Category: Internet of Things (IoT)

The #FreeBritney movement has its day in court

Business, Internet of Things (IoT), North America, Politics, Social Issues, Social Media

For those not versed in some of the further stretches of celebrity internet blogs and conspiracy theory Reddit, you might not have heard of the Free Britney movement. The online and now IRL (in real life) activist movement started with the – now famous – hashtag: #FreeBritney, which really gained its current and growing momentum in April 2019. The hashtag, being spread across multiple different social media platforms, has gone on to gain notoriety, with lots more conspiracy theories surrounding the case and its content appear online. 

Overprotected: Britney Spears, A Life Story

The spiraling downfall of iconic pop star Britney Spears was spread internationally across headlines in the late 2000s. After glossing our TV screens and magazine pages with their youthful and sexy allure, screaming of new money and celebrity high life, the public relished in their front-row seat to Spears’ mental breakdown, via the everpresent lens of the paparazzi. Interest in the popstar’s downfall came in 2007 on February 16th, when Britney famously shaved her head in public. The controversial converatorship, which has seen Spears grant all rights to her father and have no control over her legal estate, or financial and personal assets, started subsequently in 2008. A conservatorship is said to be unusual in younger and more capable persons such as Spears. It is usually reserved for those more elderly, often with symptoms of dimentia, or those that are mentally ill and unable to make their own decisions. 

Stick me, baby? Not this time!
Whilst it is awful to think of the #FreeBritney movement’s proposition: that Spears’ father has taken Spears effectively an economic prisoner, there is a glimmer of hope around the corner. Britney has called for her future court proceedings to be made public, after the conservatorship was extended until February 2020. For Spears’ fans who care so deeply about her wellbeing, this is thankful news. For the wider growing audience of interested spectators, this is the latest development in Spears’ eternally public life.

CCTV facial recognition and the Hong Kong protests

Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, Digital Systems Technology, Internet of Things (IoT)

August 24 marked another long day of clashes in Hong Kong between police and protestors.

The nearly three-month long protests generally choose their location based on certain problematic aspects of Hong Kong’s relationship with China. 

That day, the focus opposed police digital surveillance tactics, specifically the city’s installation of ‘smart lampposts’; street lights that come equipped with cameras and sensors. Hong Kong authorities insist the lampposts are only used to monitor weather, traffic, and air quality. 

Police and protestors on Aug 24

After riot police forcibly dispersed an initial gathering of tens of thousands of Hong Kong citizens, groups of protestors broke off and regrouped in different neighborhoods. Several smart lamps were pulled down, dismantled, and occasionally kicked. Police fired projectiles, released tear gas, and wielded batons and riot gear while charging lines of protestors.

Facial recognition already common

Various facial recognition technologies and devices are already common across Hong Kong. They unlock mobile devices, confirm identities at ATMS, and identify individuals in photos based on their social media profile.

Suspicions of increased mainland monitoring

The renewed concern of protestors directly relates to the catalyst for the entire protest movement: the extradition bill that sought to allow Hong Kong citizens to be tried by the mainland Chinese judiciary system.

The general public simply does not trust the new cameras, many of them developed and sold by Chinese companies, to innocuously report weather and traffic data. 

China obviously wants the ability to extradite Hong Kong citizens for crimes committed outside of the mainland. A video surveillance network in which Chinese authorities can monitor individual Hong Kong citizens is a clear path towards building cases against political targets that could facilitate a case for extradition. 

Darwin council claims new CCTV cameras “will not use facial recognition”

Internet of Things (IoT)

Darwin council insists that the new set of cameras in the Central Business District will not employ facial recognition until the technology is more carefully considered.

The 138 cameras were installed as part of the Switching On Darwin project, which also provides public wifi, new lighting, and traffic sensors. Although the cameras do have facial recognition hardware in them, the city does not plan to utilize it at this time.

However, council general manager Josh Sattler stated that although the city will not employ the technology, “requests coming from a state or federal agency” will “need to be complied with.” 

Install first, question later

Of the 81 grants offered by Australia’s Smart Cities and Suburbs program, only the Darwin proposal included funding for facial recognition technology. The Darwin council’s addition of the technology was done without public consultation. An estimated six month study by an outside consultant agency began in August.

Concerns with facial recognition

Many question the council’s decision to include a technology that will supposedly not be employed. Julia Powles, researcher and associate professor at the University of Western Australia, questions “the real reason why [the technologies] were sought in the first place”, adding “it’s like buying a supercomputer and then saying you’re just going to surf the web and check emails.”

Security of camera feeds also stands out as a major concern. Elise Thomas from the International Cyber Policy Centre, offered a warning along these lines:

“The ways in which a lot of these projects are being implemented at the level of local councils, particularly from a cyber-security perspective, those councils may not necessarily have the resources to ensure that their systems are secure”

Internet connected devices are notoriously vulnerable to security breaches. Any gateway into a network-connected device can open doors to the entire network. Depending on the type of access provided, compromised devices can be mined for data, or even remotely controlled by outside parties.

Former CEO of Theranos’ Trial Delayed

Internet of Things (IoT)

Elizabeth Holmes, former CEO of formerly multi-billion dollar valued corporation Theranos, has been awaiting trial since June 2018 over charges of wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Theranos aimed to develop medical technology providing blood analyses and diagnoses outside of a hospital setting. The trial has been delayed until August 2020, granting the defense’s request to further review evidence. The nature of the fraud and the confidence it inspired in investors are important in considering the status of internet-connected medical devices. Maybe we should all review the evidence.

Vision / Reality + Investment / Fraud

As an undergraduate, Holmes imagined a wearable patch that would provide doctors with real-time changes in patients’ blood. This notion of patient data being collectable and analyzable (by patients, doctors, insurance companies, advertisers) inspires most internet-integrated personal medical devices. Refining the patch into a station that could quickly analyze small blood samples, Holmes left school and founded Theranos, securing deals from Safeway and Walgreens to begin implementing these stations at their stores. The product development story doesn’t progress much further than that. After repeated missed deadlines and inconclusive results, both companies cancelled their contracts in 2015 and 2016. Walgreens filed suit and receieved $30 million in damages. 

At the same time, investment and valuation were skyrocketing. Within four years, the company had raised over $40 million. Ten years later, it was up to $400 million, and the company was valued at $9 billion. Over $100 million each was invested by: Rupert Murdoch, Betsy DeVos, Cox Media Group, and the Walton family. Obviously, there was a lot of media coverage during this time, which certainly fueled further investment, despite the concomitant failures of the device itself.

For health or money?

Things that have been energetically invested and promoted that end up failing (Fyre ) are easy routes into the hopes of investors, consumers, and the culture that shapes them. The dream of a pocket doctor is for patients not just to be able to record their medical data from outside of a clinic—like a FitBit might—but also to offer algorithmically-produced diagnoses. Devices such as these would, and do, create huge data troves revealing unseen information about users (‘patients’ seems less applicable at this point). That such a large amount of investment in Theranos devices came from retail and media moguls gives good reason to look for other (read: commercial) uses of such a depersonalized (replacing both the doctor and patient with figures) collection and analysis of medical information. The market for internet-connected healthcare devices was estimated two years ago to reach over $130 billion by 2021.