Jordan Peterson: This Is Why I Don't Embrace Government Use Of Facial Recognition

for five minutes we began this hearing by reciting a pledge of allegiance I'd like to begin my questioning by reciting the Fourth Amendment because I think the other side of the aisles kind of forgot some of the terms that are in there the right of the people to be secure in their persons houses papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized this is in our constitution Mr Michelle can you tell us how the bank secrecy act and exemptions to the right to financial Privacy Act may not be in compliance with the Fourth Amendment or how the implementation of those acts May violate the Fourth Amendment sure uh much like Brian iight uh alluded to a minute ago once the bank or a financial institution has the information the government has it so uh this came up in the early Supreme Court or in the early Court challenges it came up in the Supreme Court cases uh that eventually those cases eventually went to the Supreme Court in that you have effect we effectively have a law that is a blank check for the federal government or for law enforcement to obtain all of your information simply without a warrant so without probable cause they do not have to get a warrant they do not have to show probable cause to get the warrant they they have to give an oath or affirmation no to a judge no uh no they have to go to the bank yeah so it it seems to me that these uh these acts they're not just uh out of date but they're outside of the Constitution um Mr Knight you began your opening statement by characterizing some of the things that the government could know or infer about you based on how you spend your money could you elaborate on that or reiterate what what are the things that government can know or infer based on purchasing habits government can know almost everything about you with a relatively High degree of confidence they know where you live they can figure out where you work they can figure out potentially things like your sexual orientation they can figure out or at least have a high degree of not of of you know accuracy in guessing what your interests are they can figure out or have a high degree ingressing what your religion is what you know political beliefs you support and they can you know potentially figure out at least have a better than average chance of knowing whether or not you own a firearm they can also potentially know if you've had an abortion and it's worth noting that after the Dos decision there was a lot of concern raised about the sensitivity of medical information that would be available under the bank secrecy act in a state that prohibits or severely restricts abortion and so I I just really want to drive home the point that this is not a left or right thing or an r or D thing this is a situation where everyone has sensitive information that is potentially accessible with basically no do process Dr Peterson why are you such a lite why don't you Embrace artificial intelligence and facial recognition so and massive computer surveillance and cameras on every street corner so that we could all be safer well because there's tremendous danger in too much security there if if the emerging collusion between government and Corporation gigantic Corporation continues in the manner that it is continuing there won't be anything that you do that can't be used against you and will be used against you in very short order and the concerns that are expressed here about the local consequences of that let's say with regards to January 6th seem to me to fail to take into account the much broader threat that lurks underneath that everyone should be attending to we're we're in danger of eliminating the private sphere entirely that's already happening in places around the world particularly in China which is why I made reference to that that technology is at hand and it appears as though both giant governments and giant corporations are utilizing it in every way that they can manage and it's generally it's often motivated by the claim that that's forestalling an immediate proximal threat right well that's a short-term justification for engaging in a tremendous long-term danger and it should be perceived as dangerous to those on the left who are politically committed because it will be the politically committed who are first identified by such systems is is it true that you have a PhD yes well then why did the Canada decide that you needed more education can you tell us about that well one reason the entire transcript of an interview that I did with Joe Rogan was submitted as evidence with regards to the unacceptability of My Views what I was doing primarily in that interview that was criticized was questioning the validity of the economic models of economic collapse that were stacked upon the unstable models detailing out climate change 100 years into the future that was deemed in Canada sufficient to proceed with complaints against me with regards to my professional competence to serve as a licensed psychologist that was only one of many Anonymous complaints that were fostered directly in relation to my political views well I thank you for showing up today I think they may use your testimony as evidence that your re-education has not been successful I yield back to the chairman well done

Channel: Forbes Breaking News

Views: 77,669

Keywords:

Id: s5lglbd9Dlc

Length: 5min 55sec (355 seconds)

Published: Fri Mar 08 2024