Blog
Writing, thinking and debating about how data and AI can be made to work for people and society
Explore the Ada blog
Filter by:
The technical and ethical distinction between random and non-random biometric data
Professors Clive Bowman and Peter Grindrod CBE on why we need a legal distinction between random and non-random biometrics.
The human rights flaws in police facial recognition trials
Dr Daragh Murray explains how use of live facial recognition technology by the Metropolitan Police Service fails to comply with human rights law.
Speech to the PICTFOR Parliamentary Summer Reception
What is the next digital revolution and how can the UK further embrace it to remain a world-leading digital economy?
Biometrics and facial recognition technology – where next?
Proposing a way forward for regulators, policymakers and industry in the UK based on emerging public attitudes research.
Data science and the case for ethical responsibility
Tim Gardam's speech to the British Computer Society on the history of data ethics and the importance of the Ada Lovelace Institute.
Public deliberation could help address AI’s legitimacy problem in 2019
The importance of public legitimacy was illustrated by a series of public, highly controversial events that took place in 2018.
The ethical and political questions raised by AI
Dr Steven Cave's speech from an Ada Lovelace Institute event held at the Nuffield Foundation on 4 December 2018.
Context, agenda and ways of working
In our 2018 prospectus, we set out the context, agenda and ways of working of the Ada Lovelace Institute.
A welcome from our Executive Chair
Our Executive Chair, Sir Alan Wilson, introduces the Ada Lovelace Institute.
Data for the common good – framing the debate
To help us to better understand data, including its uses and ethical implications, various analogies are used.
Building the evidence base for data and AI ethics
What impact is the debate on data and AI ethics having on independent public research?
Keeping society in the loop about data ethics and AI
Do we need an implicit social contract between those developing and designing the tech and those who may be affected by it?