LightNews LightNews
cuixote.bsky.social
@cuixote.bsky.social
13 followers 39 following 1 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted
patcon.bsky.social
In the long arc, anything we ever do will eventually be just a story. New stories will settle on top of them, like sedimentary layers. I think we like to imagine future travellers will dig them up, put them in places of honour.
July 9, 2025 at 6:38 AM
Reposted
openrightsgroup.org
We currently have the right not to be subject to a legal or significant decision based solely on automated processing.

The Data Bill removes this right, requiring individuals to scrutinise and assert their rights against decisions made by AI.

Our letter 🔖 www.openrightsgroup.org/app/uploads/...
We are a group of trades unionists, academics, CEOs, NGOs and campaign organisations in fields impacted by automated decisions, such as Artificial Intelligence and profiling technologies; which is to say, nearly every area of our lives. We work on data policy, policing, children, racial justice, employment, health, and disability rights. We have academic expertise in the areas of AI ethics, Computing, Law and Human Rights, run tech companies, and represent workers with expertise in technology. We recognise that there are benefits to be gained from Artificial Intelligence. We also see that there are risks. Where we hope both we and the government can find consensus is that Artificial Intelligence technologies, in order to succeed, need to maintain the confidence of the public. The public must be able to trust the way that these technologies are employed. Yet there are concerns. Data can be biased. Models can be wrong. The potential for discrimination and for deepening inequalities is known and significant. Important machine decisions can be wrong and unjust, and frequently Artificial Intelligence providers are unwilling or unable to address shortcomings. The core of the necessary public trust relies on accountability. Decisions, whether made by humans or machines, are sometimes incorrect. To this end, we are worried by the potential for measures in the Data (Use and Access) Bill to change the way that “Automated Decision Making” is governed under Article 22 UK GDPR. We respectfully ask that these clauses be reexamined to ensure that people are not simply subjected to life changing decisions made solely by machines. The debacle over A-level results when they were algorithmically assigned in 2020 is an example of the kind of automated decision which could be challenged by an individual under the current legal framework, but would not be open to challenge under the changes proposed. Hire and fire decisions by Uber have been successfully challenged in the Netherlands. We respectfully ask that these clauses be reexamined to ensure that people are not simply subjected to life changing decisions made solely by machines, and forced to prove their innocence when machines get it wrong. The government should extend AI accountability, rather than reduce it, at this critical moment.
December 6, 2024 at 1:51 PM