Jeni Tennison
@jenitennison.com
Data nerd/wonk. Founder of Connected by Data, campaigning for communities to have a powerful say over data and AI.
Into trans rights, neurodiversity, board games, lego, dogs, spreadsheets.
www.jenitennison.com
Into trans rights, neurodiversity, board games, lego, dogs, spreadsheets.
www.jenitennison.com
January 5, 2026 at 8:08 AM
Reposted by Jeni Tennison
Well, @greenparty.org.uk policy on AI states: "We shall place deliberative & democratic processes, & the voices of those most affected by particular technology development and deployment, at the heart of data governance and AI regulation." (1/2)
December 30, 2025 at 10:36 AM
Well, @greenparty.org.uk policy on AI states: "We shall place deliberative & democratic processes, & the voices of those most affected by particular technology development and deployment, at the heart of data governance and AI regulation." (1/2)
I would love to know how @karminker.bsky.social and @cfiesler.bsky.social manage it
December 30, 2025 at 9:19 AM
I would love to know how @karminker.bsky.social and @cfiesler.bsky.social manage it
To give a felt sense of a meaningful say over AI in a way that actually has an impact on AI deployment, we need collective power at scales that matter to us: in our workplaces, our schools, our hospitals, our local governments.
Which party in the UK is closest to offering that?
Which party in the UK is closest to offering that?
December 30, 2025 at 6:59 AM
To give a felt sense of a meaningful say over AI in a way that actually has an impact on AI deployment, we need collective power at scales that matter to us: in our workplaces, our schools, our hospitals, our local governments.
Which party in the UK is closest to offering that?
Which party in the UK is closest to offering that?
Regulation is part of the answer as it demonstrates effective democratic control. But it only operates at a distant national level.
Individual-level controls feel good but are ineffective – we know this from experience with social media – especially given we are affected by others' uses of AI.
Individual-level controls feel good but are ineffective – we know this from experience with social media – especially given we are affected by others' uses of AI.
December 30, 2025 at 6:59 AM
Regulation is part of the answer as it demonstrates effective democratic control. But it only operates at a distant national level.
Individual-level controls feel good but are ineffective – we know this from experience with social media – especially given we are affected by others' uses of AI.
Individual-level controls feel good but are ineffective – we know this from experience with social media – especially given we are affected by others' uses of AI.
But public hostility to AI is only growing, and dismissing/ignoring people's fears and concerns leaves political space for populist opposition.
The response needs to both actually shape the trajectory of AI (eg to public good) and address our emotional need for autonomy and control.
The response needs to both actually shape the trajectory of AI (eg to public good) and address our emotional need for autonomy and control.
December 30, 2025 at 6:59 AM
But public hostility to AI is only growing, and dismissing/ignoring people's fears and concerns leaves political space for populist opposition.
The response needs to both actually shape the trajectory of AI (eg to public good) and address our emotional need for autonomy and control.
The response needs to both actually shape the trajectory of AI (eg to public good) and address our emotional need for autonomy and control.
Big tech money undoubtedly influences politics, but that's not the only motivation for policymakers. AI is technological progress and technological progress has generally (arguably!) benefited our societies and economies. Of course policymakers don't want to leave those potential gains on the table.
December 30, 2025 at 6:59 AM
Big tech money undoubtedly influences politics, but that's not the only motivation for policymakers. AI is technological progress and technological progress has generally (arguably!) benefited our societies and economies. Of course policymakers don't want to leave those potential gains on the table.
I can only conclude that this is a bit of meaningless AI PR fluff.
This is a shame, because supporting informed decision making using complex predictions is something AI should be really good at. We should be learning about the contexts in which it works, as well as when and why it doesn't.
This is a shame, because supporting informed decision making using complex predictions is something AI should be really good at. We should be learning about the contexts in which it works, as well as when and why it doesn't.
December 29, 2025 at 12:20 PM
I can only conclude that this is a bit of meaningless AI PR fluff.
This is a shame, because supporting informed decision making using complex predictions is something AI should be really good at. We should be learning about the contexts in which it works, as well as when and why it doesn't.
This is a shame, because supporting informed decision making using complex predictions is something AI should be really good at. We should be learning about the contexts in which it works, as well as when and why it doesn't.
If this was a used and useful tool, shouldn't we expect to see an evaluation by now that could provide some hard numbers about its benefits? I'd even settle for an anecdote from a hospital about how it actually redeployed staff or freed up beds to cope with a predicted surge in admissions.
December 29, 2025 at 12:20 PM
If this was a used and useful tool, shouldn't we expect to see an evaluation by now that could provide some hard numbers about its benefits? I'd even settle for an anecdote from a hospital about how it actually redeployed staff or freed up beds to cope with a predicted surge in admissions.