In a recent TEDxToronto talk, SRI Director Gillian Hadfield examines how we can restore balance with big tech companies, and why it requires reinventing our rules for the 21st century. Hadfield argues that by developing new ways to become as innovative about our rule-making as we are about our technologies, we can meet today’s challenges.

Everyone from users to scholars to regulators has demanded greater transparency around recommender algorithms. What kind of information would be useful to ensure transparency, and can we even agree on what we mean by “transparency”? Guest contributor Jonathan Stray explores these questions on the Schwartz Reisman blog.

SRI Research Lead Wendy H. Wong examines the issues at stake around facial-recognition technology, and their impacts on human rights and consent. Wong argues data alters basic conceptions of autonomy and dignity in ways that “profoundly change human experience”—leading to a need to reconsider the framework of human rights for the digital era.

Guest blogger Kees Westland explains how the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent reference opinion about carbon pricing legislation could affect the analysis of Bill C-11. Can Parliament enact minimum national standards in areas of shared jurisdiction under the trade and commerce power? As Westland observes, the inherently global nature of a problem can be an argument in favour of a federal approach.

A new pilot program from U of T’s Department of Computer Science and the Schwartz Reisman Institute, led by Professors Sheila McIlraith and Diane Horton, will embed modules on ethics within undergraduate design courses, bringing greater attention for students on the social effects of technical systems.

SRI Director Gillian Hadfield and Vector Institute President and CEO Garth Gibson respond to the Ontario government’s new Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) Framework by articulating how to achieve fair and trustworthy AI while supporting robust investment in AI technologies.

Schwartz Reisman Director Gillian Hadfield argues that current approaches towards explainable AI are insufficient for users. What is needed instead is “justifiable AI” that can show how the decisions of an AI system are justifiable according the rules and norms of our society.

In the second of two posts, Leslie Regan Shade, Monica Jean Henderson, and Katie Mackinnon explore research on children’s and youth’s experiences of online spaces, their needs for privacy protection, and how conceptions of digital tools and the corporations that make them can be better informed through digital literacy.

In the first of two posts, Leslie Regan Shade, Monica Jean Henderson, and Katie Mackinnon explore the implications of Bill C-11 in terms of impacts on digital privacy for youth and children. The authors reflect on the need to balance online risks and opportunities for minors in the context of their research with The eQuality Project.

When we say that something is good or bad, is that a claim about objective facts, or something dependent on our perspective? Guest blogger Cory Travers Lewis reflects on Denis Walsh’s way of thinking about norms—one which treats them as both objective facts and as dependent on the perspective of particular living things.

In a new op-ed for The Globe and Mail, SRI Faculty Affiliate Marlène Koffi explains how Canada’s ongoing internet-connection crisis has highlighted many existing social inequities during the COVID-19 pandemic. To correct this, Koffi argues government must update its data collection methods and invest in public-private partnerships.

SRI Graduate Fellow Shabnam Haghzare reflects on Joanna J. Bryson’s seminar about AI ethics, AI as human-authored tool, and the need for AI regulation in the service of public good. Bryson is professor of ethics and technology at the Hertie School in Berlin.