Collect less
Gather only what the declared human purpose requires. “It may be useful later†is not a purpose.
THE DIGITAL PRIVACY COVENANT
A private life is part of a free life.
KHH supports powerful technology. We reject corporate and state systems that convert a person’s history, attention, relationships, movement, and vulnerability into permanent power over them.
Privacy is not secrecy.
It is room to become.
Human beings need unobserved space to think, try, fail, contradict themselves, change beliefs, form relationships, seek help, and become someone new. A society that remembers everything about a person can quietly deny them the freedom to change.
AI intensifies this danger. A single data point may be harmless. Years of location, language, purchases, pauses, faces, voices, friendships, health, sleep, fear, desire, and attention can reveal when—and how—a person is easiest to influence.
THE CIVIC LINE
A government may investigate a person. It may not inventory a people.
KHH rejects suspicionless population surveillance. Public safety does not require a permanent map of everyone’s face, location, associations, reading, speech, health, purchases, or private life. Targeted investigation requires a specific lawful purpose, narrow scope, named human authorization, an expiration date, independent review, and notice when doing so no longer creates a concrete risk.
Read the Data Sovereignty DeclarationExplain the bargain
Consent must identify what is collected, what is inferred, who receives it, how long it remains, and what changes if a person says no.
Do not weaponize the long tail
Do not combine years of behavioral data to exploit grief, loneliness, addiction, illness, financial stress, political fear, or developmental vulnerability.
No synthetic intimacy for persuasion
An AI that earns emotional trust must not secretly use that relationship to sell, recruit, radicalize, extract disclosure, or change civic behavior.
Inference is personal data
Predictions about health, identity, emotion, risk, belief, or intention deserve the same protection as facts a person directly supplied.
Children do not owe a permanent dossier
Minimize childhood data, prohibit behavioral advertising and manipulative profiling, and create meaningful expiration as children become adults.
Make deletion real
People must be able to access, correct, export, and delete data—including derived profiles—without navigating a punishment maze.
Keep a human path
Essential services must provide a workable route that does not require invasive tracking, biometric surrender, or agreement to personalized influence.
No surveillance state
No government should continuously track a population merely because technology makes it possible. Security must begin with a target and evidence—not with collecting everyone in case they become useful.
No biometric dragnet
Face, gait, voice, genetic, and other bodily identifiers must not become a universal public tracking layer. A body is not a license plate.
No data laundering
A state must not purchase, request, or infer through a contractor what it would need specific lawful authority to collect directly.
Make exceptional power expire
Emergency access must be narrow, logged, reviewed, and automatically end. A crisis cannot become the quiet birth certificate of a permanent surveillance system.
Separate assistance from authority
AI may assist, translate, organize, recommend, and protect. Named humans remain responsible for investigation, eligibility, enforcement, appeals, and exceptions.
Prove restraint
Independent auditors should be able to test collection, retention, inference, targeting, government access, model access, deletion, and manipulation controls.
THE ONE-SENTENCE TEST
Would this still feel fair if the person understood exactly how well the system knew them?
If the answer depends on obscurity, fatigue, legal density, emotional attachment, default settings, or the person never seeing the complete profile, it is not meaningful consent.
Read the Human Sovereignty CharterOur technology position
KHH is not asking people to abandon technology. We want technology that protects privacy by design, runs locally where practical, encrypts what must move, expires what need not remain, discloses synthetic interaction, and helps people live the lives they choose—not the lives a prediction system can most profitably produce.