header-logo header-logo

AI, algorithmic discrimination & population bias

169508
Algorithmic discrimination is causing real harm to people across the globe. We need to work towards a cross-jurisdictional solution, writes Dr Sebastian Smart
  • Decision-making responsibilities once entrusted to humans are now often delegated to automated systems. This may improve efficiency, but algorithmic discrimination is on the rise, leading to global concerns about fairness, equality and justice.
  • This complex area is complicated further by the diverse approaches taken by jurisdictions around the world. There is an urgent need for universally accepted definitions and frameworks.

Algorithmic discrimination has become increasingly prevalent. It is growingly common to observe cases of bias and disparity arising from algorithmic decision-making. These processes often rely on complex algorithms found in systems that impact aspects of our lives, ranging from social media algorithms to credit scoring methods, job recruitment procedures and even law enforcement practices.

The significance of understanding algorithmic discrimination is amplified in today’s digital age; decision-making responsibilities, once entrusted solely to humans, are now frequently delegated to automated systems. While algorithms offer advantages,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll