Trump’s ‘Smart Wall’ of A.I. Cameras Is Watching the Border, and More Than a Million People; The New York Times, October 22, 2026

 Bora Erden and Nicholas Nehamas, The New York Times; Trump’s ‘Smart Wall’ of A.I. Cameras Is Watching the Border, and More Than a Million People

"For decades, Republicans and Democrats agreed that a “smart wall” of surveillance cameras and other high-tech equipment would be a potent tool to stop illegal immigration and drug trafficking across the southern border.

Now, the smart wall has arrived — and it is more powerful than many could have imagined.

Already, more than one million people in the United States and Mexico live in areas along the border where they can be seen by A.I.-powered surveillance towers, a New York Times analysis found. At least four million more live within view of an older generation of cameras that the government plans to retrofit with A.I. technology.

And the Trump administration has secured more than $1 billion to build 1,500 new A.I. towers. The goal is full coverage along the U.S. border with Mexico, and there are plans to install towers near Canada, as well as in coastal areas and in Puerto Rico.

But a rising public backlash against A.I. and growing anxiety over mass surveillance have left some communities with an uncomfortable question: Is the potential loss of privacy worth it?"

Mom Calls Out School for Making an AI-Generated Photo of 6-Year-Old Daughter as an Adult (Exclusive); People,October 20, 2026

Georgia Slater, People; Mom Calls Out School for Making an AI-Generated Photo of 6-Year-Old Daughter as an Adult (Exclusive)

"Anderson also raised concerns about how schools are using AI and whether parents are consenting to using these systems.

“I think the initial concern was ultimately the privacy implications. What software was used? Was it an outside platform? What happens to those pictures after? Did any of us actually consent to that?” she says. “Those are questions I think every parent deserves answers to.”

“Children cannot meaningfully consent to this sort of use; I think our children deserve protection, not only of their image, but of their minds,” Anderson adds."

AI agents are only as good as the personal information you share. That raises privacy concerns; WRAL News, October 19, 2026

WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS , WRAL News; AI agents are only as good as the personal information you share. That raises privacy concerns

"Many have welcomed AI agents into their online lives, and raved about how personalized assistants like Muse can handle everyday tasks with ease — from snagging a dinner reservation or planning a trip, to organizing email inboxes. But like other AI bots, the agents are only as good as the information they have access to. They perform better the more they know about a user — and perhaps also that person’s friends, family and even colleagues. That raises privacy concerns."

Always on, always listening: New AI devices are pushing legal limits and could put users in jeopardy; CNBC, October 18, 2026

MacKenzie, Sigalos, Annie Palmer , CNBC; Always on, always listening: New AI devices are pushing legal limits and could put users in jeopardy

"Many state wiretap and eavesdropping laws are written around whether a private communication was intercepted or its contents were acquired — not simply whether a conventional audio recording was created. 

Colin Zick, a privacy and data security attorney at Foley Hoag, said Apple appears to have learned from the first wave of litigation over voice assistants. But the new technology raises questions those earlier cases never had to answer: Can a system that is continuously listening, interpreting speech and turning it into a summary still amount to an interception if it never saves the underlying audio?

Some state laws define interception broadly. Massachusetts, for example, defines an intercepting device to include equipment capable of “transmitting, receiving, amplifying, or recording” a communication, while the “contents” of a communication can include its substance and meaning. 

In Zick’s view, a device that continuously receives speech and produces a written summary could potentially fall within that language even without retaining an audio file.

And in some states, the bigger legal risk may fall not on Apple, Amazon or other AI gadget makers but on the person wearing the device."

Saudi OpenAI employee arrested after recording device found in headquarters; The Guardian, October 13, 2026

Maya Yang, The Guardian; Saudi OpenAI employee arrested after recording device found in headquarters

"OpenAI said it has found a hidden recording device in one of its offices and has referred the matter to the FBI. One of its employees has been arrested.

In a statement on Tuesday, the San Francisco-based AI company said it discovered the “sophisticated recording device” and used one of its “models to understand the device and where it had come from”...

Abdulrahman Alfozan, 35, a Saudi national, was arrested on 9 October, according to a press release from the US Department of Justice.

Alfozan allegedly plugged an encrypted recording device, concealed within toilet paper, into a TV in an executive conference room in OpenAI’s San Francisco headquarters on 28 September. Meetings in the room regularly covered confidential information, the FBI’s press release said. A security sweep conducted two days later revealed the device, according to the justice department. Surveillance footage allegedly documented him walking around the meeting room in the days leading up to its discovery."

Supreme Court Weighs Privacy Law From the Videotape Era of ‘Be Kind, Rewind’; The New York Times, October 14, 2026

Ann E. Marimow , The New York Times; Supreme Court Weighs Privacy Law From the Videotape Era of ‘Be Kind, Rewind’

The justices will consider how the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988 applies in the digital age of streaming videos, email newsletters and targeted advertisements.

"When the Senate considered President Ronald Reagan’s nomination of Robert H. Bork for a Supreme Court vacancy in 1987, a journalist in Washington obtained and published a list of nearly 150 movies the federal judge and his family had rented from a local video store.

Judge Bork’s nomination was scuttled by the Senate for reasons unrelated to his family’s decision to rent “The Shining” and “Sixteen Candles.” But lawmakers were so upset about the “Bork Tapes” becoming public that they passed legislation the following year to prohibit video stores from disclosing the private information of customers.

Forty years later, the Supreme Court on Wednesday will examine how that privacy law, adopted in the VHS era, applies in the age of streaming, email newsletters and targeted online advertisements.

At the heart of the case is the question of who can sue under the Video Privacy Protection Act, or what it means to be a consumer whose privacy interests are protected by the law. The issue has divided lower courts and has implications for a broad swath of Americans and companies doing business online."

A college in Illinois tried to cancel its Flock contract and it refused; The Verge, October 11, 2026

TERRENCE O'BRIEN , The Verge; A college in Illinois tried to cancel its Flock contract and it refused

"In April of 2025, Elgin Community College had six Flock safety cameras installed to “enhance the safety and security of students.” But by September of that year, the school’s administration grew concerned that Flock was sharing data with Customs and Border Patrol, that camera feeds were not properly secured, and that both law enforcement and the company’s employees were abusing access to the data.

So in October of 2025, Elgin Community College requested Flock to remove its cameras. According to Elgin’s President Peggy Heinrich, Flock rejected the request, saying it had not violated its contract. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, school officials reached out again in December, offered to pay for the remaining five months of the contract, and still requested that the cameras be removed. They were met with silence."

Surveillance company Flock cuts staff as privacy backlash grows; TechCrunch, October 9, 2026

Zack Whittaker, TechCrunch; Surveillance company Flock cuts staff as privacy backlash grows

"Surveillance camera maker Flock is cutting its workforce as the company faces ongoing and growing backlash to its license plate readers and people-tracking technology.

News of the staff cuts comes from Reuters, which reported that Flock is reducing its staff by 18%, or around 270 employees, across the board. The publication said the employees are leaving at the end of October following a voluntary buyout program...

Flock has faced heavy criticism and mounting pushback from communities across the United States and legislators looking to rein in the company’s privately run mass surveillance program. Flock has installed over 100,000 license plate-reading cameras across the U.S., which allow police and federal agents to track the location and whereabouts of vehicles passing by them. Dozens of police officers have been arrested, fired, or forced to resign for abusing access to Flock’s system to search, track, and stalk people without a warrant or their permission."

Countries weigh banning smart glasses over privacy concerns; Reuters, October 6, 2026

Reuters; Countries weigh banning smart glasses over privacy concerns

"Governments, courts and companies are considering restrictions and examining existing rules on smart glasses amid worries that the technology, brought to mainstream by ​Meta's Ray-Bans, could be used to photograph, film or audio-record confidential ‌materials or people without their knowledge.

Here is a summary of what countries and regions are doing to protect people's privacy, in alphabetical order."

‘This is not what I signed up for’: Flock cameras raise privacy concerns across West Virginia; The Dominion Post, October 8, 2026

 

EVIE SAFRAN, The Dominion Post; ‘This is not what I signed up for’: Flock cameras raise privacy concerns across West Virginia

"For Monongalia County residents Lathwell and Paige Reiring, concerns over Flock cameras have created an unlikely point of political common ground.

Lathwell identifies as politically conservative, while Reiring is a Mountain Party candidate for the West Virginia House of Delegates. Despite their political differences, both question how much information the government should be able to collect about people who have not been accused of a crime.

For Lathwell, the issue comes down to privacy.

"I don't like this at all," she said. "This is not what I signed up for."

Reiring's concerns center on the technology behind the cameras and the amount of data they can collect.

"For me, the issue is the automated aspect of ALPRs, automatic license plate readers, because a lot of these depend on AI-powered software and surveillance systems, which is where we get the harvesting of data," Reiring said.

Their concerns show how the debate surrounding Flock cameras does not fall neatly along traditional political lines. As the technology becomes more common in Monongalia County, residents from different sides of the political spectrum are raising similar questions about privacy, surveillance and the collection of their data.

As artificial intelligence becomes capable of doing tasks once left to people, Flock's automated license plate readers are doing the same for law enforcement - identifying vehicle information and making it searchable for officers.

The technology can speed up investigations. It also means information about ordinary drivers can be collected before they are suspected of a crime."

Own a gun? Go to church? Do yoga? AI can find out in seconds.; Politico, September 1, 2026

ALFRED NG, Politico; Own a gun? Go to church? Do yoga? AI can find out in seconds.

A series of demos on the Hill has both Democrats and Republicans alarmed about artificial intelligence’s ability to plumb commercial databases for information on Americans.

"Lawmakers and staffers from dozens of congressional offices have seen AI’s privacy-busting prowess in demos arranged in recent months by CivAI, a nonprofit that says its aim is to educate the public about AI’s dangers and capabilities.

Besides building troves of personal information gleaned from commercial databases, the dossiers offer advice on potential ways to blackmail, coerce or stalk the individual in question, according to four Republican and eight Democratic staffers who were granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.

The demos started landing amid the debate over whether to renew a set of government spying powers that expired in June — legislation that offers the most realistic chance for addressing the issue during this Congress, a Democratic House aide who witnessed one of the briefings said."

OpenAI Must Turn Over 20 Million ChatGPT Logs, Judge Affirms; Bloomberg Law, January 5, 2026

 

Kyle Jahner

, Bloomberg Law; OpenAI Must Turn Over 20 Million ChatGPT Logs, Judge Affirms

"OpenAI Inc. will have to turn over 20 million anonymized ChatGPT logs in a consolidated AI copyright case after it failed to convince a federal judge to throw out a magistrate judge’s order the company said insufficiently weighed privacy concerns.

Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang sufficiently considered privacy concerns against the material’s relevance to the ongoing litigation in her discovery ruling in favor of news organization plaintiffs in five lawsuits, District Judge Sidney H. Stein said in an order Monday. She rejected OpenAI’s arguments it should be allowed to run a search of the 20 million-log sample and produce conversations implicating the plaintiffs’ works, saying no case law requires the court to order the least burdensome discovery possible."

Trump celebrates TikTok deal as Beijing suggests US app would use China’s algorithm; The Guardian, September 16, 2025

Guardian staff and agencies , The Guardian; Trump celebrates TikTok deal as Beijing suggests US app would use China’s algorithm

[Kip Currier: Wasn't fears about the Chinese government's potential ability to manipulate U.S. TikTok users via the TikTok algorithm one of the chief rationales for the past Congress and Biden administration's banning of TikTok? How does this Trump 2.0 deal materially change any of that?

Another rationale for the ban was concerns about China's potential to access and leverage the personal data and impinge the privacy interests of TikTok users in the U.S. How does this proposed arrangement substantively address these concerns, particularly without comprehensive federal data and privacy legislation to give Americans agency over their own data?

The American people need maximal transparency and oversight of any kind of financial deal like this.]

[Excerpt]

"One of the major questions is the fate of TikTok’s powerful algorithm that helped the app become one of the world’s most popular sources of online entertainment.

At a press conference in Madrid, the deputy head of China’s cyber security regulator said the framework of the deal included “licensing the algorithm and other intellectual property rights”.

Wang Jingtao said ByteDance would “entrust the operation of TikTok’s US user data and content security.”

Some commentators have inferred from these comments that TikTok’s US spinoff will retain the Chinese algorithm."

Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts; The Conversation, July 23, 2025

1. Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University, The Conversation; Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts

[Kip Currier: ICE immigration lawyers intentionally hiding their names, and immigration court judges facilitating this practice, should chill the blood of any lawyer and non-lawyer concerned about accountability, transparency, ethics, and the rule of law in a democratic country. This is not normal practice for free societies that value public trust. We should not and cannot permit such actions to be normalized: civil watchdogs like the ACLU and legal groups like the American Bar Association (ABA) have a responsibility to publicize their positions on these concerning Kafkaesque developments in U.S. courts and society at large.

The speed at which the U.S. is transitioning into an autocratic police state since Inauguration Day 2025 is both stunning and terrifying.

For more information on these issues, see here and here.]

[Excerpt]

1. "Something unusual is happening in U.S. immigration courts. Government lawyers are refusing to give their names during public hearings.
2. 
   
3. In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.
4. 
   
5. When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.
6. 
   
7. New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities. 
8. This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters."

Adobe Responds to AI Fears With Plans for Updated Legal Terms; Bloomberg Law, June 12, 2024

Cassandre Coyer and Aruni Soni, Bloomberg Law; Adobe Responds to AI Fears With Plans for Updated Legal Terms

"“As technology evolves, we have to evolve,” Dana Rao, Adobe’s general counsel, said in an interview with Bloomberg Law. “The legal terms have to evolve, too. And that’s really the lesson that we’re sort of internalizing here.”

Over the weekend, some Adobe customers revolted on social media, crying foul at updated terms of use they claimed allowed Adobe to seize their intellectual property and use their data to feed AI models. 

The Photoshop and Illustrator maker responded with multiple blog posts over several days seeking to reassure users it wasn’t stealing their content, including a pledge to quickly rewrite its user agreement in clearer language. Rao said Tuesday that Adobe will be issuing updated terms of use on June 18 in which it will specifically state the company doesn’t train its Firefly AI models on its cloud content.

The unexpected online storm around the updates is the latest example of how sweeping technological changes—such as the rise of generative AI—have bolstered users’ fears of copyright violations and privacy invasions. That sentiment is part of the landscape the tech industry must navigate to serve a creator community increasingly on edge.

What happened is “more of a lesson in terms of how to present terms of use and roll out updates in a way that can address or alleviate customer concerns, especially in the era of AI and increased concern over privacy,” said Los Angeles-based advertising attorney Robert Freund." 

New Windows AI feature records everything you’ve done on your PC; Ars Technica, May 20, 2024

BENJ EDWARDS, Ars Technica ; New Windows AI feature records everything you’ve done on your PC

"At a Build conference event on Monday, Microsoft revealed a new AI-powered feature called "Recall" for Copilot+ PCs that will allow Windows 11 users to search and retrieve their past activities on their PC. To make it work, Recall records everything users do on their PC, including activities in apps, communications in live meetings, and websites visited for research. Despite encryption and local storage, the new feature raises privacy concerns for certain Windows users."

How do virtual hearings affect people on the wrong side of the digital divide?; ABA Journal, December 14, 2023

 MATT REYNOLDS, ABA Journal; How do virtual hearings affect people on the wrong side of the digital divide?

"States including Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina and Texas have adopted standards for virtual hearings...

Proponents of virtual hearings say they can make people’s lives easier. Working parents can attend hearings from the comfort of their homes rather than drive miles to the courthouse and don’t have to take valuable time away from work or their kids.

Nevertheless, while that flexibility may look good on paper, some access-to-justice advocates believe an over-reliance on remote hearings could hurt the technological have-nots, particularly in communities lacking high-speed internet or those without broadband infrastructure.

In 2021, the Federal Communications Commission found that about 14.5 million Americans lacked broadband internet, which it defines as having download speeds of 25 megabits per second, or Mbps, and upload speeds of 3 Mbps. A 2021 Microsoft study put the number closer to 120.4 million people, or one-third of the U.S. population."

This App Is a Dangerous Invasion of Your Privacy—and the FBI Uses It; Popular Mechanics, January 22, 2020

Courtney Linder, Popular Mechanics; This App Is a Dangerous Invasion of Your Privacy—and the FBI Uses It

"Even Google Wouldn't Build This

When companies like Google—which has received a ton of flack for taking government contracts to work on artificial intelligence solutions—won't even build an app, you know it's going to cause a stir. Back in 2011, former Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said a tool like Clearview AI's app was one of the few pieces of tech that the company wouldn't develop because it could be used "in a very bad way."

Facebook, for its part, developed something pretty similar to what Clearview AI offers, but at least had the foresight not to publicly release it. That application, developed between 2015 and 2016, allowed employees to identify colleagues and friends who had enabled facial recognition by pointing their phone cameras at their faces. Since then, the app has been discontinued.

Meanwhile, Clearview AI is nowhere near finished. Hidden in the app's code, which the New York Times evaluated, is programming language that could pair the app to augmented reality glasses, meaning that in the future, it's possible we could identify every person we see in real time.

Early Pushback

Perhaps the silver lining is that we found out about Clearview AI at all. Its public discovery—and accompanying criticism—have led to well-known organizations coming out as staunchly opposed to this kind of tech.

Fight for the Future tweeted that "an outright ban" on these AI tools is the only way to fix this privacy issue—not quirky jewelry or sunglasses that can help to protect your identity by confusing surveillance systems."

The Secretive Company That Might End Privacy as We Know It; The New York Times, January 18, 2020

Kashmir Hill, The New York Times; The Secretive Company That Might End Privacy as We Know It

"Even if Clearview doesn’t make its app publicly available, a copycat company might, now that the taboo is broken. Searching someone by face could become as easy as Googling a name. Strangers would be able to listen in on sensitive conversations, take photos of the participants and know personal secrets. Someone walking down the street would be immediately identifiable — and his or her home address would be only a few clicks away. It would herald the end of public anonymity.

Asked about the implications of bringing such a power into the world, Mr. Ton-That seemed taken aback.

“I have to think about that,” he said. “Our belief is that this is the best use of the technology.”"

Made in China, Exported to the World: The Surveillance State; The New York Times, April 24, 2019

Paul Mozur, Jonah M. Kessel and Melissa Chan, The New York Times; Made in China, Exported to the World: The Surveillance State

"Under President Xi Jinping, the Chinese government has vastly expanded domestic surveillance, fueling a new generation of companies that make sophisticated technology at ever lower prices. A global infrastructure initiative is spreading that technology even further.

Ecuador shows how technology built for China’s political system is now being applied — and sometimes abused — by other governments. Today, 18 countries — including Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Kenya, the United Arab Emirates and Germany — are using Chinese-made intelligent monitoring systems, and 36 have received training in topics like “public opinion guidance,” which is typically a euphemism for censorship, according to an October report from Freedom House, a pro-democracy research group.

With China’s surveillance know-how and equipment now flowing to the world, critics warn that it could help underpin a future of tech-driven authoritarianism, potentially leading to a loss of privacy on an industrial scale. Often described as public security systems, the technologies have darker potential uses as tools of political repression."