I’m smashblogging on a Saturday because I came across this story on FedScoop, which discusses the Biden Administration’s Office of Science and Technology Policy’s launch of a public request for comment on their upcoming AI policy work. I wanted to Say A Few Words.
The story does not contain a link to the actual request itself.
So unnamed senior government sources that I angrytexted (they also noted the complexity of finding this) found this link here.
Oh, says I. So intuitive. So clear to all Americans that obviously some place called Federal Register is where that request for public comment would be. So I check it out, and actually, there’s a link in that document that says I have to go to regulations.gov. I hit that link and guess what: it takes me to regulations.gov. No link to the actual thing I’m looking for. But there’s a search bar. Masochistically, I type in “ai” which, obviously, nets me literally-literally 51,704 results.
Tarah eventually tracks down the actual link by searching for the document number, but notes that trying to search for it almost any other way would fail.
But could I have found it another way? Normal humans might try searching “ai” or “artificial intelligence”; what would their experience be like?
Maybe after searching “ai” the “Only show documents open for comment” checkbox filter will get me somewhere?
Ooo, the top result looks promising; looks like the NTIA wants some AI accountability. Cool, but that’s not what I’m looking for.
This is… bad. It’s bad government. It’s bad technology. It’s bad as a way of asking for help. Yes, the government is often slow and not great in its adoption of new technology, but at this point there’s no excuse for not having a system like this just work.
Still, just for fun, I figured I’d ask an AI to help me find it. I started with Bing… and it did not point me to the right place (it also found that NTIA comment request, but not the OSTP one):
Google Bard was, well, worse, telling me it “can’t assist with that.” Thanks for nothing, bot.
So then I tried another AI powered answerbot, Perplexity, and got the following:
The beginning (and the Perkins Coie) link is again about the NTIA, but the second link (huzzah!) is actually a PDF at Whitehouse.gov talking about about the actual OSTP request. But it’s just a PDF version of the link that a fed person sent Tarah which… again… doesn’t have the link to where to actually provide the comment.
It has been more than 1,800 days since the FBI said it would correct its incorrect total of (allegedly) uncrackable encrypted devices in its possession. Back in the glory days of its “going dark” narrative, the FBI claimed it had more than 7,800 impenetrable devices in its possession. Some congressional scrutiny, much of it spearheaded by Senator Ron Wyden, forced the FBI to actually take a look at its presumed totals. That additional scrutiny forced the FBI to admit its tracking software had vastly over-represented its supposed encryption problem.
The promised corrections have yet to arrive. Instead, we’re left with nothing but the footnotes added to every public statement/document the FBI misrepresented the encryption “problem.”
This nearly-six-year failure to correct the device count hasn’t prevented the FBI from continuing to claim (without even its own facts in evidence) encryption is doing nothing but making criminals better, faster, and stronger.
If the FBI wants to put device/communication encryption on the legislative chopping block, it should at least have the intellectual honesty to behave like an adult in the room, rather than like a child telling everyone they’ve lost at “guess a number between one and ten” by changing the number every time someone makes a successful guest.
The FBI owes us answers. Apparently, no one can compel it to give those answers to us. Instead, the FBI is granted yearly budget increases and broad leeway to radicalize people solely for the purpose of arresting them. We, the people, get fucked. And we’re expected to pay for the privilege.
It appears the FBI doesn’t believe we’ve been dicked around quite enough yet. As Patrick Eddington reports for Reason, the FBI wants us to pay to confirm its bias against encryption — something that protects us against malicious criminals as well as malicious federal agents.
On April 24, the FBI’s war against public key encryption technology—the kind many of us use for texting, emailing, and online banking—entered a new phase. The FBI published a notice in the Federal Register seeking public comment on its proposal to “collect data on the volume of law enforcement investigations that are negatively impacted by device and software encryption.”
Tellingly, the bureau is not asking state and local law enforcement agencies how many times they were able to get into cell phones, tablets, or computers despite the presence of encryption technology. This new, skewed “data collection” rule is designed to further the FBI’s longstanding “going dark” narrative: that encryption is making the bureau’s job next to impossible in terms of fighting crime.
Absolutely shameless. Goddamn craven. This is some bullshit. And we’re not even allowed to deliver comments to that effect because the FBI has chosen the “no public comments” option while asking cops to tell the FBI what it wants to hear.
The “View Additional Information” leads you to the paragraph where the FBI tells you, the people, that the FBI isn’t really interested in the governed having any say in this narrow, biased information gathering effort.
If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Edward Abraham, Unit Chief, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Module D–1, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306 (phone: 304–625–4830).
Yes, all you’re able to comment on is how long it might take or how many government resources might be tied up. You’re not allowed to tell the FBI to shut the fuck up about encryption until it issues the corrections it promised more than a half-decade ago. You’re also not allowed to tell the FBI you’ve found plenty of workarounds to address encryption, even if you’re a law enforcement agency. The FBI only wants information that agrees with its narrative.
This collection is needed to collect data on the volume of law enforcement investigations that are negatively impacted by device and software encryption.
“Negatively impacted” is the only concern. The FBI doesn’t want input that shares knowledge about encryption workarounds or the multiple private sector options law enforcement has that mitigate the impact of device/software encryption. The FBI wants publicly-funded confirmation bias. It is in no way interested in actually seeking the truth about encryption’s impact on criminal investigations.
I have asked the FBI to respond to its refusal to allow the public to comment, despite claiming this proposal will accept public comments until June 23. I’m not expecting to get a straight answer. I’m actually not expecting to receive any answer at all. The FBI has long since decided its largest stakeholder — the 300+ million people who pay its employees’ salaries — isn’t worth addressing honestly or openly. Whatever comes of this will be used to propel the FBI’s false narrative. And we’ll be expected to foot the bill for the estimated 50,667 federal hours it will take for the agency to continue creating “going dark” fan fiction.
While the FCC formally voted to kill net neutrality late last year, the actual repeal of the rules doesn’t occur until the repeal itself is published in the Federal Register. Sources tell Reuters that with Ajit Pai’s agency having completed the finishing touches on its repeal, the publication should finally happen this week. Once that happens, there’s a 60 day window before the actual repeal takes effect, meaning the rules will formally end in April:
“The U.S. Federal Communications Commission is expected to publish on Thursday its December order overturning the landmark Obama-era net neutrality rules, two sources briefed on the matter said Tuesday.”
Of course that’s really just the beginning of an entirely new chapter in the fight to prevent broadband monopolies from abusing a lack of competition in the broadband space (remember: net neutrality violations are just a symptom of a lack of competition, a problem nobody wants to seriously address for fear of upsetting campaign contributors).
The publication in the Federal Register opens the door to the myriad lawsuits that will be filed against the agency. Those lawsuits range from suits by Mozilla and consumer groups, to the 22 state attorneys general who say they’re also suing the agency for ignoring the public interest. These lawsuits must be filed within the next 60 days. Expect the court battle to quickly begin heating up in March.
The publication also starts the 60 day shot clock on net neutrality activists’ attempts to use the Congressional Review Act to reverse the FCC’s repeal. As we’ve noted that effort needs just one more vote in the Senate, but faces a steep uphill climb in getting approval in the House, where ISP-loyal lawmakers are even more common. It would then require the signature of President Trump, something unlikely to happen. The gambit does have one primary benefit: it will force lawmakers to put their disdain for net neutrality and the will of the public down on paper ahead of the looming midterms.
That said, the lawsuits have a fairly solid shot at reversing the FCC’s attack on the rules thanks to numerous missteps by the agency. As we’ve well documented, the FCC turned a blind eye to identity theft and comment fraud during the repeal by “someone” clearly trying to downplay massive public opposition to the FCC’s plan. The FCC also made up a DDOS attack for the same purpose, and used debunked lobbyist data as the cornerstone of the repeal. Expect a lot more data on this behavior to surface during the court challenge.
As we’ve noted previously, you can expect ISPs to remain on their best behavior for the foreseeable future. Comcast, AT&T and Verizon policy marionettes will be eager to try and suggest that concerns about the repeal were hyperbole. ISP lawyers also won’t be keen on providing any ammunition to help opponents in court. And since the next FCC or a future congress could just pass net neutrality rules again — ISP lobbyists and compromised politicians are busy pushing fake net neutrality legislation with only one real purpose: prevent real, tough rules from being passed later.
It’s worth reiterating that ISPs aren’t just killing net neutrality here. They’re actively eroding most meaningful state and federal (FTC and FCC) oversight over a broken, uncompetitive market. And should ISPs successfully navigate all court challenges and pass their desired legislation codifying federal apathy into law, the result won’t be subtle. Anybody that thinks otherwise hasn’t watched Comcast do business the last few decades.
While we’ve been disappointed by some moves by the Obama administration (on copyright, federal shield law, civil liberties, warrantless wiretapping, etc.), one area where the administration has made really big strides is on opening up formerly locked up gov’t information. The latest is that the Government Printing Office and the Office of the Federal Register have just opened up the “Official Journals of Government” — a document that used to cost a mere $17,000/year and is now available for free, online — and made the Federal Register (basically the list of what the federal gov’t is doing every day) XML enabled, so that anyone can do cool stuff with it. Ed Felten’s team at Princeton has already created FedThread, which let you not only search the Register, but also annotate and create customized feeds. This is really great…
