Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)

I thank all the witnesses. I was struck by the point about resources. One of the options within the Digital Services Act is the digital levy and the idea of a digital levy contributing to funds that can be used for digital empowerment so one is not, for example, depending on direct grants from the companies that need to be regulated. The witnesses might comment on that.

When we come to resources, Mr. McWeeney spoke about the environmental issue, and that is fundamental. When we talk about fear, it is not necessarily fear of technology, but there is concern about the environmental impact in terms of resources and energy and how that stacks up against what the benefits are. The witnesses might comment on that.

What I wanted to focus on mainly, however, was the question of recommenders. We have heard from the witnesses that a lot of the focus is on entry points to the Internet, but people find ways around that. There are maybe two areas where it is about how the industry itself is regulated. This is not about how children or young people are regulated in their engagement but about the company's practices. One is the question of safe by design, the idea that if you are a 14-year-old using it or a 34-year-old using it, for example, as was mentioned, you should know that you are engaging with an AI tool. Either one should be told. That is building safe by design.

On recommender systems, this is actually within the Data Protection Act. There is a section which says that it would be an offence to process the personal data of a child for the purposes of direct marketing, profiling or microtargeting. That section was never commenced. That meant it never came into effect as law, even though it is in the 2018 Data Protection Act.

Some of the witnesses are young teenage girls and boys. Is there scope in terms of ensuring companies cannot build a profile of users to say they are a teenager girl or boy and, therefore, they want to send those users particular materials, either because their advertisers would like them so directed or for whatever other reason? The idea is that young people should be able to use tools to do particular things they ask for but those young people and their data should not be a product. Do we need to look at how companies harvest and use people's data in terms of targeting information? Will the witnesses comment specifically on that?

My last question is particularly for Grace, Fionn and Reuban. Is there a concern when they talk to people using AI about how often it is wrong and the prejudices that are built into it, either from how it is being trained or, sometimes, from the companies' owners? Is there an awareness of inaccuracy and prejudice within AI? Noeline might respond first, followed by Fionn, Grace and Reuban.