You say not to put people there and leave it to the machines. This is not possible.
They said peer to peer electronic cash is not possible. A central bank was always supposed to be necessary. We were supposed to have to always trust centralized institutions because decentralized institutions weren't considered possible. Perhaps those who think it is impossible are wrong?
is a gross violation of human rights.
Can an algorithm violate human rights? Perhaps, but an algorithm cannot "know" anything and merely computes. It's not able to violate your privacy. This is particularly true if the right cryptography is used (homomorphic encryption) which renders it impossible by mathematics/physics for your privacy to be violated as the information being computed by the AI is not decipherable.
I think you don't understand the nature of computation or of machines. Computation is already something which occurs in non-humans, and even in the non-living. For example rocks could be said to include computations, or cloud formations, or many natural things. My idea is to keep no secrets from computation itself (think pancomputationalism) but to merely restrict human computation, as privacy applies to human beings, not to nature itself or non-human computation.
When you are worried about trees, plants, and non-human animals spying on you, then you are missing out on the ability to benefit from their computation. The universe is said to be a computational system which we keep no secrets from.
See these helpful videos:
References