Does OpenAI actually have a "red line" on mass surveillance in its new deal with the Pentagon?
New @techpolicypress.bsky.social piece lays out the key questions on what the agreement means, and what's permitted or prohibited:
Anthropic's fight with the Pentagon shows just how easily AI surveillance can be turned against the people in this country, fueled by the government's purchases of our private data. U.S. privacy law is decades behind the technology. Congress must step in.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
The expanding war in Iran brought to the fore questions about the role of technology in armed conflict, including the controversial use of new artificial intelligence technologies. Tech Policy Press invited perspectives from experts on what they are watching for as the situation unfolds.
In this Tech Policy piece, I criticize how framings of Anthropic’s & OpenAI’s negotiations with the US’s DoW overindex on myopic interpretations of human oversight, papering over what should be the real target of our scrutiny: that generative AI algorithms are a flawed and inaccurate technology.
As @amostoh.bsky.social and I explain, the Pentagon's dispute with Anthropic should not distract from the broader crisis at hand: Congress's failure to regulate some of the riskiest uses of AI - namely, amplifying surveillance and automating the use of lethal force.
The Anthropic dustup has one clear message: Our privacy rights should not be dependent on backroom deals between tech CEOs and the surveillance state.
New from 404 Media: CBP tapped into the online advertising ecosystem to track peoples' movements, according to an internal DHS document. Shows for the first time DHS tracked phones via process for putting ads in ordinary apps—video games, fitness apps, many more www.404media.co/cbp-tapped-i...
Important 🧵on how the military’s use of Claude and other agentic AI could blow open the data broker loophole.
@emileayoub.bsky.social, @jlkoepke.bsky.social and @jakelaperruque.bsky.social are all experts on this - follow them!
Congress must step in to close the data broker loophole and strengthen privacy protections against AI-enabled surveillance. And it must demand transparency into how the Pentagon is using — or plans to use — AI for mass domestic surveillance. /13
Anthropic rejected those terms, recognizing the privacy and civil liberties risks & the loopholes the Pentagon may exploit to collect and analyze commercial data on Americans. But as my colleague @amostoh.bsky.social points out, we shouldn’t rely on Anthropic — or any company — to restrain govt. 12/
On analysis: AI enables DOD to piece together data to expose a person’s movements, associations, & habits at scale — offering the “near perfect surveillance” our Founders worried about & undermining the 4th Amendment’s aim “to place obstacles in the way of a too permeating police surveillance.” 11/
One possibility is that DOD would DOD deploy Claude AI agents to siphon Americans’ sensitive data from online advertising auctions. That would give an agency the capability to collect sensitive commercial data at scale, further imperiling our privacy and civil liberties. 10/
While it’s not clear how the Pentagon might use Claude to collect this data, recall that the DOD announced last year it would partner with Anthropic and other frontier AI companies to develop and deploy agentic AI “across a variety of mission areas.” 9/
On collection: A main way brokers collect personal info is through online advertising auctions. Nearly every time you load a webpage or app, an auction occurs — broadcasting info like your location & browsing history to advertisers bidding for ad placement. Data brokers harvest that data, too. 8/
For now, though, the data broker loophole remains wide open.
So how might the Pentagon want to use Claude to collect and analyze commercially available data? 7/
It could take years before the Supreme Court clarifies Carpenter’s scope. But Congress can act by passing a law closing this “data broker loophole.” The House passed such a law (the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act) in 2024. 6/
But govt agencies, incl. military intelligence, claim that Carpenter applies only when govt compels companies to disclose info — not when companies sell or voluntarily disclose data. 5/
Is this lawful? The Supreme Court held in Carpenter v. U.S. that the Fourth Amendment requires the government get a warrant to acquire cell phone location records because they can reveal intimate details about our lives. 4/
Govt agencies have been one of data brokers’ main buyers. Local and federal law enforcement and intel agencies — incl. the NSA and military intelligence like DIA — have all evaded the 4th Amendment by buying up Americans’ sensitive info, such as location and browsing data, without legal process. 3/
Commercial data refers to the mountains of personal information harvested from mobile apps, web cookies, cars, and other Internet-connected devices. Data brokers package and sell this info, which can include location data, purchase and browsing history, and health info. 2/
NYT’s reporting on the DOD-Anthropic dispute sheds more light on how the Pentagon planned to use Claude for mass surveillance of Americans: by collecting and analyzing commercial bulk data.
So what is this commercial data? And how might Claude be used to collect and analyze it? 🧵 1/
Trump's "massive and ongoing operation" against Iran is a clear violation of the Constitution's separation of powers.
In our democracy, the president does not have the kingly power to plunge the nation into war without democratic debate and sanction. /1 www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ana...
DoDD 3000.09 *does not* prohibit fully autonomous weapons. It’s a framework for *authorizing* autonomous weapons, including weapons that do not require human confirmation between target ID and firing.
NSA surveillance sweeping up Americans’ communications overseas is also traceable to EO 12333:
25/ Congress should also use its power to close the data broker loophole and strengthen privacy protections against AI-enabled surveillance. It should demand transparency about how the military is using AI in hostilities – a critical first step towards regulating the technology.
12/ This makes it even more important that Congress close the “data broker loophole” and ban the government from purchasing location records and other sensitive data that they would otherwise need a warrant or court order to obtain.
www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...
8/ What is clear is that AI-enabled spying raises serious Fourth Amendment concerns that neither Congress nor the courts have directly grappled with – in large part because the law is not keeping up with how quickly the technology is evolving. But that doesn’t mean DOD has a blank check.
1/ The dispute between Anthropic and DOD over the limits of using AI in warfare is escalating. I’ll have more to say on what these limits should be in a @brennancenter.org report out next month. But for now, here’s what you need to know, and what’s truly at stake 🧵:
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/18/t...
This allows the Trump administration to literally condition citizenship on what it defines as acceptable speech
As I explain for @brennancenter.org, this broadscale collection undermines constitutional rights, especially given the administration’s stated goal to use these handles to screen people for speech it doesn’t like.
The Trump admin is continuing its invasive data collection efforts.
Last week, it approved a USCIS plan to collect social media handles from the more than 3 million people applying each year to change their immigration status, as well as (in some cases) the handles of their U.S. citizen relatives.
