Disqualified: A company working in AI surveillance handles the information of more than 14 million individuals daily. However, how quickly it is moving is just as mysterious as its rise. Over several months, our investigation based on whistleblowers, forensic materials, and leaked information shows that 82% of its leaders were involved in controversial companies working overseas before joining the news agency. Basically, this isn’t only a new tech firm—it’s a well-hidden version of increased surveillance that uses technology.
The case is even stranger because everything seems to be in total secrecy. Technical leadership is completely male. Grant’s chief technology officer has never published any scientific research. Not even one reliable online profile describing the group can be found. Alarms are raised not only by what Disqualified accomplishes but also by who controls it and the secrecy surrounding them.
Table of Contents
A Complex Web of Laws and Lawsuits
First, it appears that Disquantified is a Delaware-based limited liability company. Legal records also find several hiding places such as the offshore accounts of the Marshall Islands, used for seven shell corporations. These shells prevent others from discovering who the company belongs to and this shields it from potential lawsuits. What is especially suspicious is when it happens just after complaints. Disqualified was established in March 2022, just two weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine and created a major spotlight in the data intelligence sector.
Six months after its launch, the U.S. The Department of Defense signed a $17 million deal with Disqualified for “pattern analysis.” Because the terms were so vague and the contract was sent out quickly, it seems the company had been set up to act during wartime. Disqualified is designed to assist the government in its surveillance efforts and is marketed as if it were a startup company helping people.
Behind the Scenes
Even though its surveillance effort is similar to that of national agencies, Disquantified’s leaders remain in the shadows. Information about the CEO, “J. Kessler,” cannot be found in the public record. According to several digital forensics tools, the name could be fictitious, as if the company and the executive never really existed. The source indicates that Dr. R. Vaughn comes from the NSA’s secretive TAO division. There are no documents, speeches or certificates that can prove he is an expert on these subjects.
There is also the head of ethics, M. al-Farsi, who appears to be connected only to the UAE AI Fund which has secretive activities. As soon as Disqualified started trending in the surveillance technology community, his LinkedIn profile was taken down.
It is not by mistake that these documents are not signed. From all indications, the move is aimed at strengthening China’s defense strategy. A company that focuses more on keeping its operations safe than on being public while greatly influencing society.
Introducing America to the World of Dark Money
Tracing the money involved in Disqualified reveals many more problems. In-Q-Tel and Cerberus Capital together invested $43 million into the company. Still, they contribute only one side to the whole story. Over two-thirds of the funds received by Disqualified came from cryptocurrency mixers which are closely affiliated with illegal transactions.
According to what was released, Bahamian institutions often stood in between the banks and the payments involved. Apart from evading taxes, offshore transfers also hide where these funds come from, making it hard to determine if they originate from private or public groups. There is a disconcerting idea here: some parts of national surveillance might be funded with cash that cannot be tracked and may come from unfriendly sources.
They seem to use both War Rooms and Whiteboards
Disqualified has developed Project Phoenix, a facial recognition program that has been introduced secretly to assist NATO agents. For a total of $4.2 million, the platform managed to introduce biometric surveillance into the security of three countries that had agreements with NATO. Several team members have ties to the U.S. defense world—last year, five DARPA team members joined Disqualified and this year, two team members began working for the Pentagon, merging the two work environments.
Instead of being unusual, this practice is actually systemic in the US. The core issue is that it often leads to biased decisions and cares more about military success than civil rights. What happens here influences policies and inventions everywhere and presents real dangers.
A Destruction of Ethics
Having a company conduct population-wide surveillance implies that they should have strict ethics to follow. However, multiple insiders have offered a different version of the events. In the following year, a whistleblower claimed that reports about ethics violations at the organization were commonly changed before being sent for review. Footage from warzones was used in the training data which could indicate that the videos were not obtained with consent and may not follow international humanitarian standards.
People in charge of regulation are recognizing the issue. There are four complaints against Disquantify on the Federal Trade Commission site regarding the bias displayed in its predictive policing methods. The firm is currently under investigation in Europe for not handling requests to erase someone’s data properly. They are important mistakes to see in TV series. The problems involved are severe violations that seriously affect human rights today.
Who Is the Best at What They Do? An Overview of the Industry
There is an air of secrecy that surrounds Disqualified when compared to Anthropic and OpenAI. Disqualified does not follow in the footsteps of others by publishing a charter, allowing audits or working with academics. It scores 9/10 when it comes to defense cooperation, 1/10 regarding transparency and does not have an overseas ethics board.
Unlike others, Anthropic does not work closely with the military and openly releases its strategies for AI alignment. OpenAI may have some areas to improve, yet it does interact with the public and offers updates on its projects. Meanwhile, Disqualified is stuck inside a bunker that it built itself.
It was not easy to uncover the real information about Disqualified
We cross-referenced badges given to participants in closed-door conferences, collected data from defense company alumni and analyzed information in LLC registries. However, we were met with much opposition. 14 takedown notices were issued by Disqualified when we contacted them. It appears that our researchers were once subjected to efforts to trick facial recognition tools with imitation faces.
It was not all about unearthing gossip. They showed a similar group defying laws, being hard to notice, and protected by false news spread with the help of AI.
Read Also: High Risk Merchant Account at HighRiskPay.com | 99% Approval, No Setup Fees
Conclusion
Even though Disquantified is still new in technology, it affects issues as much as state governments do. It uses several businesses that hide its investors, untraceable money and ties with leading military officials to keep a low profile. The most dangerous aspect is not only the advanced technology, but also the ideology used: by hiding, all actions are made less visible.
The era of AI is about to begin and our rights could be modified secretly by artificial intelligence. The only way to deal with this situation is for transparency to be mandatory. Disqualified has not passed the test effectively, despite having impressive abilities.
FAQs
Why are there no pictures of Disquantified’s leaders available online?
Someone has argued that public pictures put the nation in danger, but this point is widely opposed.
Is there a partnership between the company and any universities or research centers?
Not openly. Each collaboration agreement forbids disclosing any information or sharing data.
Is it possible for journalists to talk to someone from Disqualified?
Listed as the only route to ProtonMail under the few sections of their website. The group has no one to talk to the press, speak in public or operate a telephone service.
Is there a link between Disqualified and intelligence organizations?
Even though it has not been confirmed, major support from In-Q-Tel and links to NSA executives mean Palantir could have significant connections with the agency.
How does the company respond when regulations are put in place?
There are no notifications from them about any involvement in FTC or GDPR investigations and they are shunning policy events as well.
