The AI Resist List had its London launch, presenting the various project that are part of its network. Some notes. #
Yesterday, the AI Resist List came to London. The event at London’s venerable King’s College, part of London’s Data Week, was used to present different projects that have become part of the network. The event was held in the Anatomy Lecture Theatre, quite appropriately, to dissect the AI industry, its hype and ethical issues. I was there and took some notes.
Tania Duarte, founder of We and AI, a volunteer non-profit organization focusing on critical AI literacy, kicked of the event laying out the idea behind the AI Resist List, cutting straight to the point: The AI industry’s narrative is based on telling the story that AI is inevitable, and any resistance or even questioning is a futile attempt.
In a world where the AI industry builds its technology by being extractive and dehumanizing LINK, what does resisting it mean? And how can we learn from history? And important part of dismantling the dominating narrative is to document stories of resistance against the industry, from legal challenges to artistic projects, a core aim of the AI Resist List project.
Marion Meyers, a researcher from We and AI, explained the nine pillars that are supporting the “Empire of AI”.
Kate Devlin of the Digital Futures Institute at King’s College presented her key findings of a recent survey, showing that more and more people are worried about AI. This however also presents a chance, with the AI industry having achieved such a huge unpopularity in such a short time.
Dr Yulu Pi, a Research Fellow at the University of Warwick, explained the different ways how the industry is avoiding accountability, and how we get there by making it hard for the companies to hide. Lisa Gutermuth, program manager at the research project Ranking Digital Rights, warned about AI systems for risk to democracy.
Elenor Taylor talked about the idea of “permacomputing” which attempts to take into account environmental and societal issues in today’s computing, industrial waste and exploitation. It attempts to find a more sustainable approach by extending hardware lifespans and minimising energy use, instead focussing on the use of already available computational resources.
There was an elephant in the room though, its name being capitalism, and the question in how far the AI industry is not just another cycle of exploitation of people to further growth without ethical considerations. Michael Geoffrey Asia of the Data Labelers Association talked about how only human labour makes modern AI systems possible and “every AI system begins with people”.
Maurice Carney of the Friends of the Congo talked about mineral extraction in Africa, with people paying price for technological progress and the hunger for materials to extend data centres.
Get Wolfgang Hauptfleisch’s stories in your inbox #
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Back to problems faced in the UK, Tim Squirrell of Foxglove Legal, talked about the home office overzealous use of AI, despite better knowledge, using AI systems with inherent racist bias, and the fallacy of feeding those biased results back to train AI further. Jemima Gibbons, digital anthropologist, talked about the NHS entanglement with US company Palantir, who has been contracting the company to manage its data since 2023, while it is now slowly emerging that their system is not as appropriate as it was made out to be.
Conclusion
As a network, AI Resist List appears to have grown quickly: It is great to see all the different projects tackling the multitude of ethical issues, many of which have so far gained little attention in the public.
Accountability of the industry is of course also a political question, and in a democracy we should demand that governments do their job: That goes especially for the UK, still lacking any coherent AI regulation or a dedicated regulator.
Many of the problems lead back to the question of who controls the narrative of “progress”. With AI undermining journalism by making it appear unreliable, it severs the link with real life, and is undermining democracy. While the tech media that has mostly drank the kool-aid and mainstream journalists has reduced reporting to company valuations, seeing real-life projects sends a sign of hope.
This was not a hippiesque anti-tech meeting. The problems caused by the AI industry are real and effecting real people. And real people need to challenge the industry.
PS: Apologies to the projects and participants I did not mention, there were too many.
References:
Loughborough University (2026) UK Home Office to use AI age estimation on asylum seekers — how accurate is the technology?
Lindsay Clark (2026). NHS Palantir claims face scrutiny after data suggests uneven results. The Register
Website: [AI Resist List](https://airesistlist.org/)
Website: [We and AI](https://weandai.org/)
Website: [Digital Futures Institute](https://www.kcl.ac.uk/digital-futures)
Website: [Friends of the Congo](https://friendsofthecongo.org/)
Website: [Data Labelers Association](https://datalabelers.org/)
Title Image: Collage by Wolfgang Hauptfleisch