Search
Browse the Ada Lovelace Institute website.
Filter by:
Active filters:
What is or isn’t OK when it comes to the use of biometric technologies?
Launch event for the final report of the Citizens' Biometrics Council – findings and recommendations
The Citizens’ Biometrics Council
Report with recommendations and findings of a public deliberation on biometrics technology, policy and governance
Public demands stronger regulation for all biometric technologies, the Ada Lovelace Institute finds
The Ada Lovelace Institute's Citizens' Biometrics Council concludes that biometric technologies require stronger regulation
Crowd Clouds
A meditation on people, technology, place and space
The Citizens’ Biometrics Council
Bringing together 50 members of the UK public to deliberate on the use of biometrics technologies like facial recognition.
The Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner: streamlined or eroded oversight?
When the direction of travel is towards more extensive use of biometrics and surveillance, do we need more or less oversight?
New research evidences accountability, transparency and public participation for trusted use of NHS data
Benefits to patients include things like improving disease detection or developing new medicines and treatments.
What is or isn’t OK when it comes to biometrics?
Reflections from round one of the Citizens' Biometric Council.
Regulation of biometrics debated
To mark the beginning of an independent review on the governance of biometric data, Ada hosted a debate on UK biometrics regulation
Ada Lovelace Institute announces independent review of the governance of biometric data
The Ada Lovelace Institute commissions Matthew Ryder QC to lead an independent review of the governance of biometric data.
Facial recognition: defining terms to clarify challenges
Facial recognition technology is a complex area, which means the risk of misunderstandings is high.
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.