The VChK-OGPU Telegram channel and Rucriminal.info continue to tell how artificial intelligence was introduced into the information and legal system “Legislation of Russia” (www.pravo.gov.ru), which is supported by the Federal Security Service of Russia. As a result, all the creators of “AI”, including the FSO employee, were placed under arrest. AI, among other things, would have to look for “lobbying efforts of certain groups to push through legislative initiatives, or, more simply put, corruption and officials working for the oligarchs.
Sources said that the initial goal of introducing AI into the “Legislation of Russia” was to search for errors and change the semantic load given the diversity of normative legal acts (hereinafter referred to as NLA), during the implementation itself resulted in a full-scale restructuring of almost the entire branch of legal preparation of NLA, for example, the appearance of the ability to carry out a cross-functional comparison of “closely related” legal acts in the field of technical and economic law enforcement - regulations, standards, budget documents, which very well highlights the lobbying efforts of certain groups to push “their” legislative initiatives into local and federal authorities, and even about the unification of legal acts in within the EAEU (for which this system was actually created - and there is nothing to say. Based on the results of the work, even two very serious documents were issued - Presidential Decree No. 90 of 03.03.2020 and Directive of the President of the Russian Federation No. Pr - 448 of 03.07.2020 - which practically introduce standardization of technical requirements for machine-readable law, storage and distribution of legal acts, as well as the regulatory factor of the Federal Security Service of Russia for the approval of these requirements and verification of all new legal acts at the Federal level.
“The future is one that made it possible to put an end to the “freedom” of preparing NPA at different levels of government - it had to end. And in principle, everything is there – even the tools! “The machine” - which saved the legislative power millions of man-hours - it exists, not to mention the function of literacy of legal acts operators - at the everyday level this is a huge reduction in time spent on searching and eliminating the consequences of mutually exclusive or contradictory laws, rules, GOSTs, etc. within Russia, as well as within the Customs Union and the EAEU!” the source said.
BUT! The developers went even further - after demonstrating to colleagues from the Ministry of Economic Development, revisions were made to “vectorize” the development of legislation - which, in turn, would allow specialists from the Ministry of Economic Development to roughly calculate how much it would cost to change the law and implement it in our lives. It is no secret that a huge number of laws cannot work, simply because it is impossible to calculate how much it will cost the budget. Remember the financial battles about the transition to new license plates, and the pension reform, and the eternal “discussion” of a new uniform for the military, and today’s initiative about renaming the traffic police into the traffic police? And there are more than tens of thousands of such laws, regulations, technical standards and GOSTs that require serious changes when introduced into our lives.
Can you imagine the level of “management and expertise” of legislative initiatives that would immediately reveal simply incompetence or show who benefits from this?
And after all, this “machine” with AI worked - there is an acceptance certificate, there is a certificate of commissioning into trial operation by the customer, the customer reported that everything was top-notch, he developed a technical specification for the continuation of work and the dissemination of practice to all levels of government. But something went wrong . Probably, it is not beneficial for someone - if parliamentarians and working groups in the State Duma, as well as at all levels of government, in relevant Ministries and Departments, spend less time on preparing and implementing legal acts, perhaps simply the appearance of this tool will put entire hidden groups lobbying for “unnecessary” laws, and maybe also reveal financial biases during implementation? You can also fantasize about who “dances” this IT - System - he gains considerable influence.
And here we return to the investigation itself, as dear readers remember - it is being conducted in a very strange way. Not only were 6 administrative personnel harshly detained, all software prototypes with the supporting infrastructure were confiscated - hard drives, all documentation on the project, everything was done to ensure that the developed software did not “reflect.” And two people from the final list of accused were not only not detained, but were also allowed to travel abroad - S. Lakhtin and M. Aleksandrov (one is the technical director of the project and allegedly the beneficiary of one of the key contractors), but the charges were brought almost a year later, and they put him on the wanted list after a year and a half of investigative actions.
Any investigation must prove the guilt of the suspects, and this case is no exception. After a long ordeal (changes in the charges), the investigation came to the conclusion – once The working software does not work!
In accordance with the law, when investigating cases where the knowledge of specialists and experts in the field of special knowledge located outside the scope of jurisprudence is necessary, a special examination is unconditionally and unconditionally appointed and carried out. In this case, the investigative authorities, while investigating a criminal case regarding alleged theft in the field of IT technologies, did not order or conduct the necessary research, despite numerous requests from the defense, which makes the conclusions of the investigation completely absurd. It is possible to assert that the result of a government contract is working or not, the cost and timing of its implementation, only based on a set of expert studies by specialists, and not on unfounded statements.
The main evidence - the result of work under a government contract - the defense managed to wrest from the tenacious clutches of the investigation only a year and a half after the initiation of the criminal case. And during all this time, the investigators did not bother to delve into the essence of the technical work project being created - the first stage of work, mistakenly believing that with a quarter of the allocated funds and in a year (remember that all the work on creating a state information system was designed for 6 years) it was possible to create a completely ready information system. We all know that even government information systems that have been developed over the years do not work error-free even after several years of operation, let alone a prototype.
All requests from the defense to conduct a forensic examination to determine whether there is an intermediate result of the work and compliance with the technical specifications are rejected with the wording that such a study is inappropriate, and also because there is a conclusion from a “specialist”, by the way, who has never worked in the field of legal informatization in Russia , in contrast to the accused employees of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Sistema" of the Federal Security Service of Russia, starting from the head of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise P. Nashchekin and his deputies Rusanov A. and Popov A. and the chief accountant Mironov Yu. and ending with an artificial intelligence specialist who held a position in combination with the main place works by Glazov S.
The defense independently conducted a study of the work performed in accordance with the terms of reference; based on the results of this study, it became obvious that the entire criminal case was far-fetched.
On March 22, 2024, the defense received a specialist’s opinion.
Conclusions: The goals and objectives defined in the technical specifications for the government contract have been achieved. The work has been completed in full.
The defense's attempt to add this expert opinion to the materials of the criminal case was again unsuccessful. One gets the impression that the main task of the investigation is not to investigate a criminal case, but to confront obvious arguments.
The lawyer of the accused employee of the FSO of Russia, V. Verkhovodova, has been trying for more than one hearing to demonstrate the operability of the working prototype installed on the accused’s PC, and also tried to attach documents on the performance study conducted during the court hearing. However, this caused a very strong reaction from both the investigation and the supervising prosecutor. Who did their best to convince the judge that the issue of efficiency or inability to work was not the subject of this case. And note - during the entire case (almost 2 years) there was no inspection of the working system at the Sistema Scientific and Technical Center, or on the employee’s PC, or even additional interrogation regarding the fact that the system was “suddenly working”, and yet this is the most significant circumstance affecting outcome of the criminal case.
The very fact of bringing defendants to criminal liability in a criminal case without an investigative examination does not, first of all, indicate a desire to establish the circumstances of the theft of funds, but is more like a very serious showdown over control of the “new vaccine” in the world of digital jurisprudence, possibly related to the change management of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise Scientific and Technical Center "System" of the Federal Security Service of Russia on certain controlled entities, and possibly the cessation of such "harmful" activities as cost optimization, preventing corruption and identifying lobbying groups in the development of regulatory legal acts. We don't know yet. The investigation is still ongoing, but there are more and more materials from the case itself, which scream about a “custom-made” nature. But what we know for sure is that “Machine”, through the efforts of the investigation, is not used, the development team is either under investigation, or has abruptly left this area and will never be involved in development due to toxicity.
Arseny Dronov
To be continued
Source: www.rucriminal.info
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий