Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

WEF 2025: AI CEO Says Facial Recognition Will Replace Digital IDs in Smart Cities

Published

4 minute read

logo

By

“…you won’t need a digital identity” because “you have the facial recognition and other things built into your smart cities.”

One of the panels during last week’s World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting – “Empowering People with Digital Public Infrastructure” – saw the participation of Avathon CEO Pervinder Johar, who provided a vision of a gloomy future of “optimized” and omnipresent surveillance.

Johar, of course, would not put it quite that way. Avathon, which produces AI tech, including the surveillance kind – believes that in the next five to ten years there will be no need for digital ID since facial recognition “and other things” will be built into “smart cities.”

The panel was dedicated to digital public infrastructure (DPI) – a buzzword used by digital ID proponents like the UN, the EU, the WEF, and Bill Gates – and Johar said the financial and identity portions of digital ID will “converge” to produce the result he predicted.

This suggests that the population will be under constant surveillance and identified at all times. Johar had more “good news” – Avathon makes what it calls an industrial AI platform, a surveillance system that the CEO shared has been deployed in Round Rock High School in Texas – “for children’s safety.”

It “utilizes a school’s existing camera infrastructure to proactively detect everything from a weapon to an open door, unauthorized access, or even a fire.”

Another panelist, Hoda Al Khzaimi, Associate Vice Provost for Research Translation and Entrepreneurship at New York University Abu Dhabi Hoda Al Khzaimi, also spoke about the connection between the DPI and “smart cities.”

“Digital public infrastructures came into manifestation because governments want to make sure that they provide seamless services in the rise of smart cities,” said Al Khzaimi, at the same time effectively suggesting that “the optimal application of DPI” is pushing digital ID on citizens.

Al Khzaimi also addressed the issue of DPI data. “What’s positive is that if this data provided by the DPI infrastructure are open and in many kinds of scenarios, you have open marketplaces for these data, users themselves can nudge governments and can nudge providers of these services and to tell them what do you want, and what do you not want and control the trends of how to deploy and build for solutions,” she said.

Al Khzaimi also praised the public-private partnership on the DPI. And while acknowledging the potential for abuse (“you don’t want to subject the citizens to mass analytics if they don’t want to have this mass analytics infrastructure”) she quickly contradicted herself by saying there are cases when this should be done – such as to “analyze population data for health pandemic outbreaks.”

Kapital Co-Founder and CEO Rene Saul spoke about Mexico’s digital passport (which utilizes biometric ID verification at the borders – something Saul did not mention), which he is a holder of, as a positive example of digital ID.

After all, it saved him 35 minutes.

“I arrived to Europe for the first time, and I saw the sign with other three countries that had electronic passport. So, I saved 35 minutes just to enter Europe when it took me one hour. So, that’s one of good examples, and that, and another good example of this technology is, it opened our borders,” said Saul.

Know Your Customer (KYC) was also mentioned as helpful in developing digital services such as those used by banks. KYC itself is an invasive form of digital ID verification that incorporates document scans and biometric ID verification.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

Move over Soviet Russia: UK Police Make 10,000 Arrests Over “Offensive” Online Speech

Published on

logo

By

In a nation where 90 percent of crimes go unsolved, the real emergency seems to be someone being offensive online.

Let’s get something straight. If you’re reading this from inside the United Kingdom and you’ve ever committed the heinous act of sarcasm on the internet, better close the curtains. The police might be on their way. Armed, possibly. With body cams. And a warrant to seize your copy of The Complete Fawlty Towers, just in case.
Last year, British police arrested nearly 10,000 people for saying things online that someone, somewhere, decided were “offensive.”
According to data pried out of police forces by the Daily Mail, that’s around 26 people a day. And yes, some of those probably were saying awful things. But many were not. Many were simply annoying. And in the UK now, being annoying online is grounds for a knock at the door.
The arrests were made under laws like the Communications Act 2003 and the Malicious Communications Act 1988, pieces of legislation drafted before TikTok existed, and when “going viral” still referred to the flu.
These laws were originally written to stop actual threats. Not to stop someone from tweeting something sarcastic about climate protesters.
But times have changed. Cumbria Constabulary, apparently keen to earn their badge in “Feelings Policing,” clocked in 217 arrests last year. That’s 42.5 arrests per 100,000 residents.
Meanwhile, Staffordshire managed only 21. What were they doing instead, catching burglars? How outdated.
Gwent Police weren’t far behind, either. The Welsh force made 204 arrests.
Toby Young of the Free Speech Union called the number “alarmingly high.” His assessment may be generous.
What’s truly Olympic-level absurd is the sheer inconsistency. If you’re a bit spicy with your language in Cumbria, you might be arrested before the kettle boils. In Staffordshire, you’d likely get nothing but a raised eyebrow and a politely worded leaflet.
David Spencer from Policy Exchange nailed it when he said, “The variance in approach by police forces suggests that how much freedom of speech we are allowed depends on where we live.”
A troubling sentence, because once you need a zipcode to know what jokes are legal, the country starts to resemble something more out of Kafka.
Polling suggests only 7 percent of people think online “hate speech” should be a police priority. Seven percent! Yet Britain’s police are allocating significant resources to patrol the pixelated badlands of X and Facebook while 90 percent of actual crimes went unsolved last year.
So, to recap: Your house gets burgled? Fill out a form and cross your fingers. Criticize the government’s foreign policy on Facebook? Patrol car, cuffs, and possible prison time.
It doesn’t help that the laws in question use terms like “grossly offensive” and “insulting” without defining them. As Lord Frost pointed out in the House of Lords: “’Grossly offensive’, ‘abusive’, ‘insulting’ and ‘false’ – says who?” Exactly. It’s like trying to enforce a speed limit based on whether the officer feels you were driving too smugly.
Here’s the cherry on the dystopian sundae: According to Free Speech Union’s Toby Young, Russia arrested 3,253 people last year for online speech. Britain arrested four times that. That’s embarrassing and the sort of international statistic that ought to appear in Amnesty International reports.
Continue Reading

Energy

Expanding Canadian energy production could help lower global emissions

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Annika Segelhorst and Elmira Aliakbari

Canada’s most timely opportunity to lower overall global emissions is through expanded exports to regions that rely on higher-emitting fuel sources.

The COP30 climate conference in Brazil is winding down, after more than a week of discussions about environmental policy and climate change. Domestic oil and natural gas production is frequently seen as a fundamental obstacle to Canada’s climate goals. Yet the data shows that Canadian energy production is already among the world’s cleanest, generating lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per barrel-of-oil-equivalent produced, among major producing countries. Expanding the role of Canadian oil and gas in global markets can replace higher GHG-emitting alternatives around the world, driving down global GHG emissions.

Prime Minister Carney’s first budget highlights Canada’s “emissions advantage” in a chart on page 105 that compares the amount of GHG emissions released from producing oil and natural gas across 20 major producing countries. Compared to many other top-producing countries, Canada releases fewer GHG emissions per barrel of oil and gas produced when considering all phases of production (extraction, processing, transport, venting and flaring).

For oil production, Canada has an advantage over most major producers such as Venezuela, Libya, Iran, Algeria, Nigeria, China, Russia and Qatar. Canada’s emissions per barrel of oil produced are below the global average, making Canada among the lower emitting producers worldwide.

Similarly, Canada’s natural gas production has an emissions per barrel equivalent that is lower than the global average and is below major producers such as Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Nigeria, Indonesia, China, Argentina, Malaysia, Australia, Algeria, Iran, Russia, India and the United States. The chart below reveals countrywide average GHG emissions per barrel of oil or natural gas produced in 2022.

chart

Source: International Energy Agency (2023), The Oil and Gas Industry in Net Zero Transitions 2023, IEA, Paris, p. 69 

Canada’s emissions advantage stems from years of technological innovations that require less energy to produce each barrel of oil along with improvements in detecting leaks. From 1990 to 2023, Canada’s total production of crude oil rose by 199 per cent, while emissions per barrel of oil produced declined by 8 per cent, according to Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC). In the oilsands, since 1990 emissions per barrel have fallen by nearly 40 per cent while emissions from natural gas production and processing have decreased by 23 per cent.

Canada has already implemented many of the most practical and straightforward methods for reducing carbon emissions during oil and gas production, like mitigation of methane emissions. These low-hanging fruits, the easiest and most cost-effective ways to reduce emissions, have already been implemented. The remaining strategies to reduce GHG emissions for Canadian oil and gas production will be increasingly expensive and will take longer to implement. One such approach is carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS), a technology which traps and stores carbon dioxide to prevent it from reaching the atmosphere. Major infrastructure projects like this offer potential but will be difficult, costly and resource intensive to implement.

Rather than focusing on increasingly expensive emission reductions at home, Canada’s most timely opportunity to lower overall global emissions is through expanded exports to regions that rely on higher-emitting fuel sources. Under a scenario of expanded Canadian production, countries that presently rely on oil and gas from higher-emitting producers can instead source energy from Canada, resulting in a net reduction in global emissions. Conversely, if Canada were to stagnate or even retreat from the world market for oil and gas, higher-emitting producers would increase exports to accommodate the gap, leading to higher overall emissions.

As Canada’s climate and energy policy continues to evolve, our attention should focus on global impact rather than solely on domestic emissions reductions. The highest environmental impact will come from enabling global consumption to shift towards lower-emitting Canadian sources.

Annika Segelhorst

Junior Economist

Elmira Aliakbari

Director, Natural Resource Studies, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X