Publications

Markets are being populated with new generations of pricing algorithms, powered with artificial intelligence (AI), that have the ability to autonomously learn to operate. This ability can be both a source of efficiency and cause of concern for the risk that algorithms autonomously and tacitly learn to collude. In this paper we explore recent developments in the economic literature and discuss implications for policy.

The European Union (“EU”) Artificial Intelligence Act (the AI Act) is a legal medley. Under the banner of risk-based regulation, the AI Act combines two repertoires of European Union (EU) law, namely product safety and fundamental rights protection. Like a medley, the AI Act attempts to combine the best features of both repertoires. But like a medley, the AI Act risks delivering insufficient levels of both product safety or fundamental rights protection. This article describes these issues by reference to three classical issues of law and technology. Some adjustments to the text and spirit of the AI Act are suggested.

In this paper, we perform a preliminary analysis of the technologies, firms and industries that may be affected by the possible futures of the metaverse, attempting to derive some hypotheses on the spatial effects of this process. We distinguish between two possible evolutive scenarios – the ‘metaverse shaped by reality view’ and the ‘metaverse shaping reality view’ – and factors affecting them, deriving implications for public policy planning. The first scenario presents relatively traditional core policy challenges: ensuring homogeneous availability of network infrastructures as well as the skills indispensable to catch the new technological opportunities at the local level, accompanying the reallocation of factors of production associated to disruption and addressing inequalities. In the second, the main challenge is more radical: to ensure that desirable features are incorporated in the emerging virtual worlds from the start.

​

​

​

​

[ITA] I recenti provvedimenti del Garante privacy nei confronti di ChatGPT, un sistema di intelligenza artificiale generativa di proprietà di OpenAI, sollevano riflessioni sul ruolo e la capacità delle autorità pubbliche di supportare l’innovazione tutelando al contempo i cittadini. Gli interventi del Garante mettono in luce l’impatto sull’attuazione amministrativa di una regolazione obsoleta - il Regolamento europeo generale sulla protezione dei dati - che contribuisce all’ineffettività dei provvedimenti rispetto agli obiettivi perseguiti. Neppure è risolutiva l’impostazione molto poco flessibile della proposta di Regolamento europeo sull’IA, laddove è invece auspicabile un mutamento del paradigma regolatorio alla base dell’intervento pubblico. -- [ENG] The recent actions taken by the Italian Data Protection Authority against ChatGPT, a generative artificial intelligence system owned by OpenAI, prompt reflections on the role and ability of public authorities to support innovation while simultaneously protecting citizens. The interven- tions by the Privacy Authority shed light on the impact of an outdated regulatory framework, the European General Data Protection Regulation, on the regulatory delivery, thereby impeding the effectiveness of these measures in achieving their intended goals. Furthermore, the proposed European Regulation on Artificial Intelligence, with its rigid approach, fails to provide a definitive solution, as there is a need for ashift in the regulatory paradigm underlying public intervention.

La Consob ha pubblicato il Piano delle Attività di Regolazione per il 2023, che è stato predisposto in conformità all’articolo 2 del Regolamento sui procedimenti per l’adozione di atti di regolazione generale della Consob (delibera 19654 del 5 luglio 2016). Inoltre, è stato presentato anche l’aggiornamento del Piano delle Attività di Verifica d’Impatto della Regolamentazione, relativo al biennio 2022-2023.

​