IT Essentials: Rule-maker or rule-taker?

Minimising government involvement is not a guarantee of technology success

Disbanding a data ethics advisory board is a poor way to show the world the UK is serious about AI risks.

Last week, news broke that the government had quietly disbanded the independent advisory at the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation - so quietly that it had actually happened at the start of September, and nobody knew about it.

That's not because people didn't care, but because whoever posted the announcement had taken steps to stop anyone receiving alerts. Not very ethical of them, we'd respectfully point out.

The news marks yet another step in the government's confused approach to artificial intelligence and data.

Just last week, deputy PM Oliver Dowden spoke at the UN about the importance of AI regulation, advising that tech companies should not be allowed to "mark their own homework."

And yet, there has been no public movement on regulation inside our own borders since March, when the government set out its plan for "agile" AI regulation.

Fast forward to August, and MPs were warning the government to step in quickly or risk losing any chance at being an AI leader. And still, nothing - just promotion of the November summit on AI safety.

Perhaps this is a hallmark of a conservative, small-state approach, which trends away from regulation and towards free market solutions. That's worked before, why not now?

The biggest hint is that every other major economy around the world with a stake in AI - the EU, China and even the USA - is heading in the other direction. They are walking the walk, while the UK just talks the talk.

Eventually, Rishi Sunak et al will have to start cooking or get out of the kitchen.