Automatic transcription, there could be errors.
Alessandro Oppo (00:00)
Welcome to another episode of the Democracy Innovator podcast, and our guest of today is Gianluca Mizoraki. So thank you for your time, Gianluca.
Gianluca Misuraca (00:08)
Thank you for the invitation, Alessandro. Hello, everyone.
Alessandro Oppo (00:12)
And, mean, you're working on many projects, and before we were talking about inspiring future, would you like to tell us something?
Gianluca Misuraca (00:24)
Yes. Maybe well, first of all, thanks again for the invitation, and it's a pleasure. And, I mean, maybe I give you a bit of my background and how I got in fact to to, let's say, to be to get obsessed about the future or futures in a plural term So first of all, I've been working mainly in several institutions, United Nations, European Commissions, and working always at the intersection about policy, governance, technology. So democracy is clearly very much related to this. And in particular, always looking with a future perspective. I worked at the Institute for Perspective Technological Studies of the European Commission joint to the centre in Seville for more than twelve years. We have been always looking at how technology can impact society and what could be the future of Digital Europe. So we were talking about artificial intelligence many years ago before now became the new normal, and everybody's talking about it. And we can probably discuss about this later, and what are the implications indeed for democracy. I mean before that also they called Politechnique Federardo do Nausanne is where I started looking at scenarios for the future, how to roadmap and to try to understand, anticipate especially the possible negative consequences of certain choices and certain decisions. So how to equip policymakers also with the capacity not to, let's say, see the future. Of course, this is impossible, but rather to better understand what should be avoided, for example, or what should be done, what strategies and policy would be better to put in place. That's why when I decided in the middle of COVID in 2020 to leave the European Commission, I actually set up with colleagues these new ventures, Inspiring Futures. Actually, we are based in Switzerland, but we also have Inspiring Futures Europe, actually, that is based in Madrid. But we work globally. I'm just back from The US. I'm going to Argentina next week. So we are working on different projects. In particular, and maybe this is something we can elaborate a bit more, is exactly what kind of skills in relation to artificial intelligence we should reinforce and strengthen at different levels in our society.
Alessandro Oppo (03:13)
You're saying future or also possible futures, so in the plural way. And I was thinking, how do you imagine like the a possible future or also the possible plural futures?
Gianluca Misuraca (03:27)
Well, I mean, we we I mean, we always say, I mean, there's a the the rule number one for a future is this, you know, the future does we don't know which will be the future, no? Or some would say even the future doesn't really exist, it's how we shape it, how we construct the future. And there are possible alternative futures, and that's why it's always important to look at what could be the different directions, the certain choices of today with shape different futures. So I mean, I started many years ago already to make scenarios, especially about the possible impact of technology on society, I mean, were already as many others, of course we were not the only one seeing clearly the positive and the opportunities that technologies, different ways of technologies have and can have in our society. I mean, this cannot be denied. Technology, especially digital technologies in the last thirty, forty years has completely changed our society. And I would say in general terms for the better because we can do things that in the past were not possible because of the technology and the kind of pervasiveness that we have, especially in certain parts of the world, not in all, of course. But then we have also the risks, the possible negative consequences of, let's say, the bad use, the misuse of technologies, or the fact that society has become really somehow now used so much to certain technologies and our behaviours are shaped by those technologies because of course we could not, or we didn't know how to also regulate those technologies or we didn't want to regulate, we couldn't. So if we look at social media, I mean yesterday, this is very timely, yesterday the commission launched President von der Leyen a proposal to make compulsory for minors to show their age for access in social media so that basically they cannot do so. And this is in fact a major problem for the current generation. But definitely this is something that was already anticipated, I would say already twenty years ago, our social media could be a weapon also for democracy, and we see that every day. I mean, I was in Washington last week, and if we see what's happening nowadays and the attempt to, I mean, not the attempt, actually, the disinformation that is growing because of these technologies, it's not saying, I mean, we cannot just say, Oh, we didn't know, we have not seen this coming. Actually it was there, and there are a lot of studies that were anticipating this, but probably actually the policymakers were not able or didn't want to really listen to that. Of course evidence is not so black and white. Of course there are many nuances, clearly there are some risks and some very dangerous, big, big dangers that some technologies are bringing. AI, artificial intelligence, is clearly probably the most prominent and also, I mean, powerful set of technologies that we have today that could make, of course, a very good positive contribution to society, but also could create a lot of challenges. So that's why we have to look at the future, I wouldn't say in a pessimistic way, but with careful attention to the fact that if we lose the control and it seems we are somehow or sometime losing it, we could, have bad, let's say, consequences.
Alessandro Oppo (07:48)
And so, I mean, we can shape the future. And I wonder, like, for you, like to shape a future that also you like to see And also regarding like not losing the control also in relation to technology, what do you think should be important to do?
Gianluca Misuraca (08:09)
Look, when when actually one of my last work when I was still in the European Commission was exactly in, in the period 2018, 2020. So we published this scenario for building and shaping a digital Euro 2040. And these were very timely because of course we were our work was to provide some evidence, some input, some contribution to the policy decision taken in Brussels and in the European capitals because this is a joint work, of course, of the Commission and the European Council and the Parliament. Clearly the Fund, for the first time in 2020, was launched a dedicated programme on digital from the Digital Euro programme, and a lot of emphasis was given to digital technologies with the digital digital decade policy programme, so the claim or the vision and the ambition of the European Union to become a leader or at least to start racing with the other regions in the world in different areas, including on artificial intelligence, was, let's say, something also very timely and and and interesting and and concrete because we were not just, you know, studying the future, let's say, but actually providing very concrete input to what could be done already at that time and should be done in order that by 2040, our horizon was 2040, so in twenty years we could actually really make sure that we don't go into those negative scenarios that we have also depicted just to show what could be the danger of not intervening, for example. And on the other side trying to develop an ideal scenario where we can hope, of course, that, for instance, the maker and the shapers of technology come together in an open and trusted innovation ecosystem, right? Something where we have open governance, democratic systems are not threatened by technology, and there is more social cohesion. So of course to do that we have to address those main, what we call it in foresight terms, dimensions of impact. So what could actually make this positive scenario happen or actually not become reality and bring us in a negative or a bad scenario, a dark scenario, let's say. And clearly we look already at the time at the landscape of digital transformation. So it's something that it's not only the regulation, of course, but clearly building on the regulatory framework that it's indeed what, for instance, the European Union has been building now for decades, not only the AI Act, everybody knows about the AI Act more or less, but there is a digital governance framework that has been built since many years that has a combination of rules and also incentives, because of course it also requires the need to ensure that we have an ecosystem that allows then those rules to be enforced and make sure that we have a playing level field for all European players and avoid that some players that are clearly not European are actually taking advantage of our economy, our market. And the other element that is very much linked to that is the data sovereignty issue. Basically, we have been discussing about, you know, making ourselves, everybody owner of their own data. The GDPR is all about that. Basically, it's making sure that we can control our data. And this is not necessarily the case. Actually, the current scenario, if you want, status quo, normally you have also a scenario that is, okay, what if nothing changed? Right? Where are we standing now? Basically it's a scenario that we call it of apartheid and closed innovation. Basically, first of all, all the systems that we have now, most, I mean all of them, despite their claim to be open, in reality they are very much closed. I mean, the Apple, the Googles, I mean, they are not necessarily interoperable. I mean, there has been some advances exactly because of the request by governments and in particular the European Commission, but in reality they tend to, let's say, create their own garden. On the other side, there is also the that we as users are not capable, are not equipped with the tools and the instruments to actually question this status quo. And what we do, in fact, at the end of the day, we tick the boxes of the GDPR. We hope that nothing too bad will happen. So this is exactly where we talk about digital sovereignty. We have to make sure that everybody in principle, in an easy way then, can regain the ownership and the sovereignty of those data. So digital governance and data governance become actually the two key issues that need to be addressed. And if we make it right, we are trying to do, but of course there have been many things happening since we designed this scenario in 2020 until now, then we could have maybe that ideal positive scenario for the future generations.
Alessandro Oppo (14:23)
And I think this is also related to what you were saying about which kind of skill should we develop in society also in relation to technology? I mean, AI is the main technology. Yes.
Gianluca Misuraca (14:38)
Is the buzzword or the keyword. I mean, I would say, yes, and indeed this brings me to the projects that I'm actually leading now. I mean, once I left the Commission, in fact one of my first proposals was to have a dedicated master on AI for government, AI, artificial intelligence support public services that we designed with colleagues in collaboration between the Universidad Polytech in Madrid and Polytechnico di Milano. I work with both of them. And we had also other partners from Germany, Estonia. And this master that started in 2021 and now is entering its sixth edition is a combination by design of data scientists, AI experts and specialists with design thinkers. So for instance, Politico Milano, I'm associated with the department of design. And the idea there is that we actually, when we want to use, adopt AI in public services, we really need to think carefully the design of the service, the policy, the processes, and even ask ourselves basic questions. Do we really need to use the latest technology, AI? Maybe is there something else that we need to do before maybe investing on certain technology just because it is cool. Clearly generative AI that was then exploded in 2022 a bit unexpectedly, although it has been there for a while, it even changed the game and even including, let's say, further emphasized the importance of this approach. So in design terms, we talk about reframing. We need to reframe the public sector innovation systems because they need to actually embrace the complexity that a digital transformation and especially AI enabled services are bringing to the government, the public sector, but in general to society at large. So master was very successful. Mean, we have been awarded the Digital Skills Award, European Digital Skills Award in 2023, have been also mentioned as a best practice in several UN, OECD and other international organizations, let's say, reports. But apart from that, it was because at the end of the day we train, let's say, in average 40 people per year, 40% per year. That it's good. We have very good participants. We don't call them students because they are all very experienced professionals and they then end up, maybe many of them ended up working, I don't know, in the AI office or the European Commission or the OECD AI Policy Observatory, just you mentioned UNESCO, or of course in national governments from really, I mean, course from many European countries, but also from, I don't know, from Bhutan, Philippines up to Chile, Argentina, Brazil, so we really cover and Africa as well. So we cover most of the I mean, many countries in the world, think about almost 60 different countries in the last five editions, and we are now almost about 200 a network of over 200, let's say, alumni that has been established. And so this was also the inspiration for me for launching a new project. We made a proposal under the Digital Euro programme, and I mean, I call it AI for GOV X, AI for GOV Accelerate, and this is a much larger project. We have over 40 partners and equally 40 associate partners from all over the world, also not only Europe, but we cover all Europe, but we also have Australia, Korea, many other countries. So what what we are doing here, we are launching right now a new master in a different format. I mean, AI for GOV has been crafted in a way that you have to be there virtually. I mean, it's online, but you have to participate real time. So we have classes twice per week. And then there are a couple of in person events in Madrid and in Milan where people also network because this is very important. And what we have there is a lot of project based learning, experiential learning. So you'd actually work with tools, with data, and you make your own projects and with tutorship by by some experts. And there is also a final thesis that is very much linked to your specific work. This is a invaluable experience we have seen that give is a unique added value of this program. Now, of course, as I say, this is limited to a number of participants that can actually dedicate the time and the resources for that. But now we have launched I mean, if we want to scale it up, we are making this, on a larger scale with the idea to train 3,000 people in the next three years, both through a new master, a master I call it magics, master in AI, governance innovation and digital transformation. And here we have several specializations, and you can actually make your master almost a la carte, in the sense you can choose certain modules, certain courses, many of them are asynchronous, so not real time or not in person, but there are also opportunities to do summer school, specific courses, and in different languages, not all in English. English remained prominent, of course, but in many cases we have also offers in Italian, in German, in French, in Spanish and so forth. And this is growing as we have the Masters and then we have a catalogue of, at the moment, we are already getting to about 100 courses, different formats, different universities, different also not necessarily academic institutions, also more practical oriented, for instance, boot camps, and you can choose those. And the good news is that out of the budget of the project, we have quite a large amount of resources for scholarships. So people can actually apply to a program that are already very accessible. And in addition to that, they can get 50% basically of reimbursement through this process of selection. So something I will invite everybody to join because it's really again, the approach is that it's not just listening to someone or studying, but it's really doing things, learning by doing. And you can immediately apply to your own work because that's what we have seen with the participants. We had entire teams coming from certain organizations, and then they were going back to work with some skills that they applied directly. And in addition to that, I mean, this is not yet, let's say, public in the sense that we will start the May 1, but I have also been appointed the coordinator of the European Union AI Skills Academy. We just won we won this, and this I will be coordinating this was also a call from the European Union, from the European Commission under the Digital Euro program. And we'll be working directly through with the AI office also because they have a lot of interest. As you know, there is an important element of AI literacy also in the AI Act, for example, that need to be addressed. And this I will do directly as a coordinator with my own company, Inspiring Futures Europe. So it's an additional, let's say, honor, but also responsibility.
Alessandro Oppo (23:25)
Yeah. A lot of things. I was, thinking about the transition to digital. I mean, the digital transition also regarding the public administration and and also relation to governance. And, I mean, I know that this is already happening, sometimes in a informal way, sometimes in a more structured way. And I wonder, like, if you have a sort of possible timeline that, I know that is not, that cannot be very precise, but.
Gianluca Misuraca (24:04)
Well, I mean, no, let me because this brings me to another I mean, definitely my last scenario that last year I presented we made a foresight exercise for the for the commission on Govtech. And of course they wanted to have something this is happening, right? You see a transition, as you mentioned, is something, you have a state and then you have another state, right? So you move from one state and transitioning to another state. Now, when it comes to, to digital transformation, digital government, this is not actually so, at least it's not, so easy. I mean, I've been looking at this phenomenon since even before it was called e government in the nineties, informatization in the public sector, in public administration. And of course, again, as I said before, a lot has been done, especially in some countries. I mean, if we look at Europe, I mean, we have a lot of digital services. We cannot say that nothing happened. But it is true that we, at the time, twenty years ago, we were hoping for this to be quite more radical and quick. So there's still a lot to be done. And also because there's been some, let's say, I don't know, mistake or something that does not really been done is the, the, the change that we wanted to, to, I mean, that, that should be done with these technologies sometimes is, makes also a bit of fear. No? There is some fear of change. There is a resistance to change. There is the part dependency of the organisations that, I mean, that it's very difficult to change the cultural mindset and the rules, the skills, in fact, and then, of course, the incentives for people to really make this transformation. Now in the last this work we've done on the GovTech, so I choose to look at the horizon 2050 because I think we have to go a bit farther in the of course, then we came back. We do what we call the backcasting. Right? Backcasting means we look at the long term scenario, then we come back to to what we have to do today to in order that this scenario will actually be possibly achieved. Although of course we all know that the future will be a combination of different scenarios. But in this case, apart from the various, the name we gave to the various scenarios of the non positive ones, a chameleon gov tech or the fact that we could be also ending up in mon GovTech. That's what there was, collaborative work we have done. We co designed these scenarios with experts and practitioners and different stakeholders, and of course I ensured that also younger people participated and contributed because sometimes we have the experts and we are all getting to a certain age. And one of these younger experts, I mean participants, told me, But why is 2050? So maybe and the roadmap that we had then co developed, say maybe there are things that we could already do before and why? So I mean, there was a bit of an interesting discussion. But then at the end of the day, if we look at certain prerequisite, I would even say, for this transition, this transformation to happen, we are not yet necessarily there. For example, one of the key dimension of impact in this case, we choose interoperability. And it's okay, interoperability is very easy. Right? But in reality, if we look at the case of Europe, we don't have yet such interoperability so well done in the public sector, well, maybe not even in the private sector. Basically we had to make a regulation, a proposal of regulation in Europe that entered into force last year, and now it takes some time hopefully to get to full speed. So we have to take this, but we have to make sure that I mean, have been talking about interoperability for forty years maybe, and now it's really time to make this happen. And this is not a technical issue. Technical is pretty simple. It's more a political one, a political decision, is a legal and also semantic, let's say, aspects that need to be addressed. So we basically have to make sure that we speak the same language. And when I say when there are some exchanges of information, we recognize immediately, the system recognizes immediately, and they can be put then at disposal of different organization, etcetera. And the other element where we are still, despite we have been talking about this for many years, lacking behind is the public procurement. I mean, innovation in public procurement, has been there, and there are mechanisms for doing it, but it's not much, used. I mean, we still buy technology like we are buying, I don't know, bread in the grocery or by kilograms, or we buy technologies like they are chairs and tables. Actually the old digital technology, but especially artificial intelligence, are dynamic. So we really need to make sure that when we procure something, first of all, we understand what we need, and that's why it's important, so important to have the skills and the capacity, the competencies to understand this. And on the other side, we have to also ensure that there is a continuing process of maintenance and accompanying this. So institutions and technologies are actually co evolving, and so we have to make sure that we have the correct governance systems to make this happen.
Alessandro Oppo (31:06)
I was wondering what could be like the role of a citizen that maybe
Gianluca Misuraca (31:12)
Well, I mean, this has been for some time a bit maybe exaggerated in the sense, okay, we need to have the citizen participation, you know, the first movement of e democracy participation because everybody wants to participate. Well, maybe it's not so needed because at the end of the day who wants to participate? It's probably a limited part of society or, I mean, participate actively, of course, because then you always have some way of participating. But most importantly, the citizens, users in general, they want to be served in a way that they don't even notice or they don't need I mean, they can do anything. So I mean, the thing the service comes to you is even better. And the technologies today would allow that. I mean, AI can personalise, customise the solutions for each of us. Of course, these are also some risks that we have to to to to to manage and mitigate. But in general, we could actually listen from the citizens without actually asking them what they really want or need. And but on the other side, the current systems of stakeholders' consultations or participation are very are very, let's say, limited. So we definitely can do more. And again, technologies can allow for these, for these, let's say, increased participation, strengthening the the democratic participation. So we have a project called Orbis that was exactly trying with the Polytech in Milano leading it, that was trying to build experiment with different party platforms exactly that could increase the deliberation process of of the democratic systems. There's been quite interesting results. One of them in particular is using POLIS, for example. POLIS is a platform, open source, by the way, that has been used in several countries. It was started, I think, in Taiwan, and to to really ensure the citizens' participation, user, discussion. And this is now being adapted for different format in, in the experiment. So there are some opportunities there, but still probably we need more. There are also other initiatives. I'm, for example, involved in one at European level, humans, for example. They are launching some citizens' initiatives that could allow for participation of citizens in a different format using what is already available, because there are forms of participation like referendum or citizen initiative can be done. And technology can help in that case or could help actually increase the possibility, for instance, to gain support or to sign petitions, for example. So this is something where, I guess, we should do much more, and and probably that that would be something that parliaments in particular could do.
Alessandro Oppo (34:56)
We had a small technical issue because part of the recording was lost, and that's why we are dressed in a different way. And, also, in relation to this technical problem, I I was thinking when our society will rely more even more on technology in relation to, I don't know, the public administration or or our political system, What could be the problem when, I mean, the technology doesn't work because most of the time it works? And also what could be some maybe good practices to avoid this kind of problem?
Gianluca Misuraca (35:43)
Well, thanks, Alessandro, for the question. Indeed, due to this technical issue, I mean, basically, this conversation is split into two. Last time, about three months ago, were addressing some of these topics and I mean three months ago, maybe a little time, but actually in this field it's a long period because a lot of things happened in the last few months and clearly we see how every day, I mean today I was in an event and someone mentioned that there are like 15 events per day on artificial intelligence and the topic is discussed in all environments. Of course in the public administration it is particularly relevant because this small glitch we had shouldn't happen in the public sector because we should be somehow in control and make sure that we use the technology to support and eventually augment our capacities as civil servants, as policymakers, as workers in general, and not just be instead managed by the technology. This is a big issue that the new let's say, generation of artificial intelligence now we are moving, you know, the agentic AI that in the last really few months was the keyword now is fading away and there is the physical AI topic and somehow this multi agent orchestration is what is taking place in many areas. And of course there are huge opportunities, this is clear, but there are also some possible threats and that's why indeed we need to reinforce our capacities as managers, as policymakers, as leaders to ensure that we have a governance system that allows us to take the decisions supported by these AI systems but also making sure that we are, as I said before, in control. That's why so when we talked three months ago I was announcing that we just were about to start a new initiative that I had the pleasure to lead the AI Skills Academy, the project I call AISHA, because then we are building the hub where we are addressing, we are gathering together all those actors that are these important issues in how we build capacity, skills for the future generation. And this is a very important topic that the European Commission and all Member States are putting a lot of emphasis on because of course without the skills for the future we will not be able to manage and govern these new phenomenon. And also we need to ensure that we are competitive in all sectors, so making sure that once we embrace this technology we are actually capable of making the best of it. So this applies to all the sectors from agri food to manufacturing, transport, etc. But it's particularly important for the public sector because there we have multiple roles, not only to make the rules but also to use these technologies. Public sector is, in most countries, one of the biggest procurers of technology and artificial intelligence. And so we have to make sure also that we build a sovereign system. We are not just relying on, let's say, systems that can control our data and also we are not then independent from certain actors that in most cases unfortunately are not European. So also how the data are used, how we make sure that also open source system, for instance, can be leveraged.
Alessandro Oppo (40:12)
Yeah, last time I asked you, what do you think about political parties that use a platform to connect citizens to to the people that are elected? So I was thinking about the Five Star Movement example. And if you think that this is will happen again.
Gianluca Misuraca (40:35)
Well, let me I mean, this is timely because exactly this morning in this event I met a former member of the government during one of the governments where the Five Star Movement in Italy was in charge and also a journalist. And we were talking about the fact that probably in the future, you know, some politician, some party may emerge that is actually against AI, right? And maybe they could, let's say, leverage this fear that could happen to get a lot of votes because it's true that artificial intelligence can and is disrupting our society for the good and for the bad, but also is going to have a huge impact on the work. And I'll be back on this. But I mean, I don't know if I mentioned last time, but in, I mean, almost twenty years ago, more than, yeah, twenty years ago when I was studying what we called at the time social computing, Web 2.0, I mean, basically the emergence of social media, We were doing I was at the time working in academia, called Politecnico delle Lausanne, but then I joined the European Commission, the Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. So we were looking at the future of technology, future impacts of technology. And we did a comprehensive study on the impact of social media technology, social networks on society. I was looking in particular at the use of social media, I don't know, by Obama. I remember Obama was one of the first making a campaign using Facebook and other social media. And then of course the phenomenon of the Five Star Movement in Italy was just emerging. And of course the Russo platform that has been also studied and looked in a critical way by many was potentially a very good instrument at the time because it could have, if genuinely, the possibility to reach out to different groups in society. And to a certain extent he did at the very beginning in order to make sure that anyone could contribute. Then maybe an opportunity to discuss in an event where there was one on the, I mean, son of Casaleggio discussing also this topic that maybe at a certain point the human, let's say, maybe I don't know how to say, but the fact that humans then manipulated these platforms and made this maybe become not such a good instrument. But this doesn't mean that technology cannot be, if well structured, a good support for increasing citizen participation and democratic participation to support a deliberative democracy. I mean, as we know today is not the perfect instrument, this has been said by much more important people than me. I think Churchill say that is the less worst of the systems that we have, but it's still the one that could be improved and indeed there has been an attempt and researchers are also part of a project led by Politecchiuti Milan on the use of AI systems to improve the deliberation part of the democratic participation. Clearly, we could use technologies to increase our evidence and make sure that we use data in a certain way. Clearly also social media could be used to gather feedback, perception, sentiments from citizens. Are they used? I wouldn't say that we have advanced much from probably what we hoped it could have been done maybe twenty years ago. On the other side, unfortunately, has been a lot of misuse of technologies actually for increasing disinformation, for making polarisation actually by design somehow, because we see now that many platforms are using, let's say, systems to increase the negative and the opposite discussion. And this of course is creating tensions, is making our society even more fragmented in the virtual world but then also in the real world. So clearly this is where also the European Union in particular, but in general at the global level there is an attempt to regulate also on this and now there are discussions, for instance, under the Digital Service Act or the Digital Market Act in the European Union, but also some countries are proposing, for instance, to limit the use of certain social media etc. Artificial intelligence is of course and generative AI in particular playing a big role there and because it can be really used as a weapon. And unfortunately it is used especially during political campaigns. That's why it's welcome, for instance, in Italy there has been an agreement, okay, it's not a big issue by political parties not to use certain features like the deep fake during the electoral campaigns. And clearly this is an area that will require also more experimentation because I think the behaviours of citizens is very much affected by certain technologies. So on one side we need to probably limit certain uses, but on the other side we should experiment and see what actually could be a good way of using these technologies.
Alessandro Oppo (46:49)
And for the last question is, do you have any message for all the people that are working, I don't know, in digital transformation, political tech in general?
Gianluca Misuraca (47:03)
Well, I mean, of course, I'm biased, but clearly the most important thing is that to reinforce our capacities, our skills, because we are in a situation where we are at risk and when I say we, all of us, of course the younger generation more because of course they are those that will also use this technology more, are born with these technologies and they will be the leader of tomorrow. So we are at risk of a cognitive, let's say, degeneration. So these technologies are potentially producing and there are now studies coming up that have some negative effect on our cognitive capacity. So that's one area where we have to be careful in how we use these technologies. That's why we have to make sure that we are also ready for embracing the complexity that this technology has. And this is not only at the individual level because of course we can be super expert but it's more at the organisational level and broadly speaking at the social level that we need to make sure that we have the capacities, the competencies and the skills for managing this phenomenon. We are really in an unexplored territory so it's all new and we know some of the known unknowns, but we don't know much of the unknown unknowns that are those that could be the most dangerous, but also those that could create a more interesting and inspiring futures for us all and for the next generations.
Alessandro Oppo (48:54)
Thank you a lot Gianluca and hopefully this time the recording will be saved.
Gianluca Misuraca (49:01)
So and thanks a lot and I'm happy to maybe have another conversation in another three months, but hopefully they help it.
Alessandro Oppo (49:12)
Absolutely, thank you again.
Member discussion: