Archivi tag: darpa

DIBATTITO SU SITUAZIONE ECONOMICA POST-COVID

Si è svolta il 16 ottobre all’ Istituto San Carlo di Torino ,Via Monte di Pietà 1, la manifestazione “IMPRESE e TERRITORIO: LE SFIDE POST COVID-19”, organizzata congiuntamente da Rinascimento Europeo e da DAI IMPRESA.

Hanno partecipato gli assessori regionali Andrea TRONZANO (Bilancio,Sviluppo delle attività  produttive e delle PMI)e Maurizio MARRONE. (Rapporti con il Consiglio Regionale e Affari Legali)

Il Prof. Carlo MANACORDA,Docente di Economia Pubblica, esperto di bilanci dello Stato ha parlato su EMERGENZA ECONOMICA E AIUTI PUBBLICI:RISCHIO CAPITALISMO DI STATO?

Il sottoscritto è intervenuto su L’AGENZIA DELL’INTELLIGENZA ARTIFICIALE A TORINO: OPPORTUNITÀ PER IMPRESE E PROFESSIONISTI.

MODERATORE, Marco MARGRITA,Giornalista

Il tema del colloquio era estremamente vasto, e, forse, perfino prematuro, visto che l’epidemia di Covid-19 sta riprendendo più vigorosa che mai, e anche il Recovery Fund arriverà solo a metà 2021. Tuttavia, l’incontro ha avuto comunque il pregio di porre sul tavolo diverse prospettive e di ascoltare il punto di vista della Regione.

1.L’intervento del Prof. Manacorda

L’oggetto dell’ intervento del Professor Manacorda erano le preoccupazioni per le partecipazioni di Invitalia rese necessarie dalla crisio da Covid. Il Professore   si è chiesto se gl’interventi pubblici richiesti dalla crisi da Covid, in particolare in Italia, per quanto obiettivamente indispensabili, possano assumere un carattere permanente, in quanto non si riesca, o non si voglia, salvare in breve tempo le imprese in difficoltà. Si noti che questa preoccupazione, lungi dall’essere un’opinione solo del Professor Manacorda o di una parte dell’accademia e del mondo politico, costituisce la politica ufficiale dell’Unione Europea. La Commissaria Vestager, che, essendo responsabile per la Concorrenza, è chiamata anche a limitare gli aiuti di Stato alle imprese, hadichiarato che, se è vero che la Commissione staconcedendo  agli Stati ampie esenzioni dal divieto per contrastare la crisi da Coronavirus, queste esenzioni saranno molto ben delimitate.

Personalmente credo che la Commissaria Vestager rappresenti una visione “vecchio stile” del diritto della concorrenza, che non tiene conto della realtà economica e politica del nostro secolo, dove non si contrappongono più tanto Stato e mercato, bensì la linea politica delle Grandi Potenze definita brillantemente a suo tempo dal Kalecki come “Keynesismo militare”, in cui le esigenze economiche teoriche vengono subordinate a quelle militari, che a loro volta  vengono trasformate in stimoli per il PIL nazionale,  e quella definita allora da Fanfani come “corporativismo democratico”, adottata in fondo poi dall’ Unione Europea, secondo la quale il potere pubblico si fa portatore degl’interessi costituiti più forti o meglio rappresentati, senza l’ambizione di una precisa strategia.

Quest’orientamento da parte dell’Unione sta producendo, a mio avviso, effetti sempre più dannosi per l’Europa, come dimostrato dall’ incredibile mancanza di tempestività e di resilienza  a cui sono stati dovuti la lentezza del processo di formazione della nuova Commissione, la farraginosità dei programmi economici, il continuo slittamento della Conferenza sul Futuro dell’ Europa, l’incredibile lentezza, rispetto ai Paesi asiatici, nel contrastare la pandemia, e, infine, l’ incapacità di adottare, in otto mesi, non soltanto i “provvedimenti urgenti”, che dovrebbero rilanciare l’economia, ma, addirittura, il Quadro Finanziario Pluriennale (cioè il bilancio) 2021-2027, che, secondo precedenti esternazioni della Commissione, avrebbe dovuto sostenere il raggiungimento, da parte dell’ Unione, di una posizione di leadership mondiale.

2.Il ruolo centrale dell’ intelligenza artificiale

Nel mio intervento, ho ricordato come sia difficile separare l’intelligenza artificiale, non solo dagli altri settori dell’informatica, bensì da tutti gli ambiti di attività della vita moderna, che si tratti di strategia, di politica, di scienze, di didattica, di medicina, di amministrazione, di comunicazione, di produzione, di economia. L’Intelligenza Artificiale costituisce uno degli elementi fondamentali nella costruzione delle società contemporanee, e per questo motivo le Grandi Potenze, a partire dagli Stati Uniti, ne hanno fatto (e ne fanno sempre più) una questione strategica per la sicurezza nazionale. Per questo l’informatica e l’intelligenza artificiale sono state favorire, e, anzi, addirittura create, con i fondi di un Ente Statale responsabile per lo sviluppo delle tecnologie militari, il DARPA. Sulla falsariga degli Stati Uniti, quasi tutti i Paesi del mondo si stanno dotando di un organismo simile al DARPA, che, in Cina, si chiama, significativamente, “Comitato per l’ Unione fra il Civile e il Militare”. In ambo i Paesi, lo Stato detta i percorsi che le aziende del settore, che sono prevalentemente private, (GAFAM e BATX) debbono seguire per fornire al Paese le adeguate competenze.

3.La situazione in Europa

In Europa, prevale la tutela degl’interessi costituiti, sicché, non essendoci forti gruppi economici operanti nel settore, vi sono poche pressioni per favorirlo. Ciò detto, l’Unione ha, e continua a perseguire, anch’essa,  proprie politiche di sviluppo del digitale, adottando documenti programmatici (come il pacchetto presentato il 28 febbraio), e sponsorizzando iniziative del settore privato, ma con molto meno energia dei suoi concorrenti. Inoltre, il “pacchetto” finanziario che avrebbe dovuto sostenere un deciso “salto” del digitale europeo è in ritardo di un anno a causa dei disaccordi sulle linee programmatiche secondo cui supportare le economie colpite dal Coronavirus, sicché i fondi dedicati a questo tema sono stati drasticamente ridotti, non se ne conosce l’importo definitivo, e saranno comunque disponibili solo a partire dall’estate prossima.

Vi sono varie iniziative in fieri, che procedono a bassa intensità oppure sono ancora latenti, ed attendono una decisione sui finanziamenti italiani, che verranno presumibilmente sbloccati solo quando si saprà di quelli europei.

Il paradosso è che, giacché il Recovery Fund, come pure i corrispondenti finanziamenti italiani, erano stati concepiti come provvedimenti d’urgenza, il lavoro di programmazione è ,non solo iniziato, ma in certi casi è già perfino finito anche se non è chiaro se le misure previste saranno poi quelle effettivamente finanziate.

Comunque sia, ci troviamo di fronte a una pletora di documenti che definiscono, in termini estremamente vaghi, ciò che dovrebbe essere fatto, ma si tratta di programmi non adeguatamente “sgrossati”, di cui si sa fin dall’ inizio che solo una parte potrà essere realizzata.

4. L’Istituto

L’Istituto Italiano per l’Intelligenza Artificiale fa parte della Strategia Italiana per l’Intelligenza Artificiale. Il Governo attende, per la fine del mese, commenti, che l’Associazione Culturale Diàlexis sta finalizzando. Comunque, le cose che interessano di più la maggioranza, cioè sede ed assunzioni, si faranno nel 2021 (quando, si spera, ci saranno i soldi).

Purtroppo, quest’incertezza sull’Istituto deriva da una generale incertezza sulle politiche dell’Unione. Manca una precisa strategia. A questo problema ho dedicato un libro, inviato a tutti i vertici dell’Unione, in cui propongo che, invece di creare 27 istituti nazionali di tecnologia e 27 istituti nazionali per la proprietà intellettuale, se ne crea uno solo (European Technology Agency, EIT). A Bruxelles, mi rispondono che ne esiste già uno, l’ Istituto Europeo per la Tecnologia, con sede a Budapest, la cui disciplina è stata rivista a Luglio perché la Corte dei Conti aveva trovato delle magagne. Ho scritto a tutti i membri della Commissione del Parlamento Europeo, in seguito ad una lettera di Sassoli, di non votare il rifinanziamento dell’ EIT fino a che non si sia fatta chiarezza su una strategia unitaria. Ho inviato a tutti una copia del libro sull’Agenzia Europea per la Tecnologia, invitandoli a fare, dell’Istituto Europeo, una vera agenzia centrale con competenza su tutti gli sviluppi tecnologici europei. Di fatto, il Parlamento sta rifiutando l’intero pacchetto finanziario tra l’altro perché non c’è un’adeguata copertura delle spese tecnologiche.

Nel frattempo, l’unica cosa utile per territori, istituzioni e imprese, è continuare a fare progetti e a cercare di farsi sentire dalle diverse Autorità (Commissione, Governo, APRE, Enti locali) che si stanno occupando della questione.

L’Associazione Culturale Diàlexis si propone come tramite dei suggerimenti di tutti e organizzerà al più presto un momento di confronto. Visto che siamo in un mezzo lockdown, si tratterà quasi sicuramente di un webinar.

5.Le ricadute sul Territorio

In particolare, per ciò che riguarda l’Istituto, la preoccupazione maggiore è quella che, come al solito, esso si traduca solo in una riallocazione di fondi fra i soggetti che già ne fruiscono, come l’Università e il Politecnico, senza che il territorio ne tragga alcun giovamento.

Ricordiamo che il nostro territorio versa in una crisi gravissima, che la politica e i media tendono a sottovalutare, o ad annegare in nella generica crisi da Coronavirus, mentre invece si tratta di una crisi torinese immersa  in una crisi italiana che fa parte di una crisi europea, che richiederebbe una strategia specifica, la quale invece non c’è. Occorrerebbe finalmente dirci tutta la verità sul perché di questa crisi (fine degli strascichi del “keynesismo militare”, fine della presenza della FIAT Holding, della capogruppo di Fiat Auto e di buona parte dell’ indotto, insufficienza delle politiche culturali..)

Soprattutto in questo momento, in cui tutto viene trasformato in uno strumento di potere, o almeno di concorrenza economica, vale più che mai l’idea che la ricerca debba avere una ricaduta pratica, economica, e, perché no, anche politica, Altrimenti, a che cosa servirebbe la proprietà intellettuale? Orbene, l’idea che non sia previsto un utilizzo concreto della ricerca, né che ci siano vincoli al suo utilizzo fuori del territorio, mi sembra veramente suicida.

Un esempio tipico di come un istituto di ricerca possa sganciato da una ricaduta pratica per il territorio mi sembra l’Istituito Italiano di Tecnologia di Genova (a cui per altro le Autorità sembrano ispirarsi). Non mi sembra che il livello culturale, l’occupazione o il reddito di Genova siano stati sostenuti in qualche modo percettibile dalla presenza dell’ Istituto.

In realtà, come evidenziato nel mio libro, ci sono qui enormi lacune, sia nel campo della ricerca accademica e della cultura, che in quello della ricerca applicata: anche se molti vi si sono cimentati ed esiste una pletora di documenti ufficiali, mancano studi adeguati sull’ etica dell’intelligenza artificiale e sulle strategie delle industrie del web in Europa. Mancano piattaforme in concorrenza con i GAFAM americani e i BAATX cinesi, in particolare per ciò che riguarda la promozione dei territori e il web marketing.  Manca soprattutto una strategia precisa per l’upskilling digitale a tutti i livelli, che potrebbe eventualmente fare rinascere una competenza tradizionale torinese, quella dell’ISVOR.

Soprattutto, visto che l’Istituto per l’Intelligenza Artificiale è a Torino, e non lontano dall’ Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, e non esiste, né in Italia, né in Europa, alcun altro centro delegato a studiare le future strategie digitali per l’Europa, sarebbe il caso che l’Istituto avesse, tra l’altro, il compito di fare proprio questo: studiare e proporre strategie (teoriche e pratiche) per il digitale, da poi proporre (e/o vendere) altrove (all’ Unione Europea, agli altri Stati membri, alle Autorità, alla finanza, alle imprese.

Il dibattito che si dovrebbe aprire intorno all’ intelligenza artificiale può essere un punto di partenza per un dibattito più ampio sull’informatica nella società del XXI secolo, sfatando quei molti luoghi comuni che impediscono di darci una strategia seria.

In conclusione, abbiamo una serie di scadenze;

1)formulare proposte per il Governo, le Istituzioni, la Commissione…

2)costituire un luogo di dibattito e di aggregazione del territorio intorno alla questione delle strategie di digitalizzazione, in modo da creare una massa critica;

3)stabilire  un trait d’Union con la proposta del Comune di candidare Torino come Capitale Europea della Cultura;

4)preparare iniziative editoriali specifiche (come databases interattivi);

5)finalizzare e distribuzione dei libri già pronti;

6)fare un webinar entro dicembre con tutti gl’interessati

EUROPEAN TECHNOLOGY AGENCY: LETTERS TO THE EUROPEAN POLITICAL GROUPS

European Space Agency

Turin, 22 May 2020

Honorable President Weber,

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able not only to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems, but also to develop an autonomous  societal system, able to translate, into the society of intelligent machines, the “European way of life” which the Institutions purport to develop.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met.

In particular, we note also that, in  the present Industrial Strategy under discussion, in contrast to what foreseen in Minister Altmaier’s Industriestrategie fuer Deutschland und Europa,  attention is paid only to SME, whilst, on the contrary, announcements from different parts had hinted at a strategy for European Champions, comparable to the ones of the USA and of China.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. I note also that in his interventions in Strasburg, the Pope had warned against “unknown empires”. These empires may be blocked only by a European Web, which the Institutions should  build up according to the models of ESA, Arianespace and Airbus. This herculean work cannot be carried ourt by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency.

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistency in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

Riccardo Lala

Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32  10125 Torino,  tel 0039011660004  00393357761536  website: http://www.alpinasrl.com

Arianespace, European launchers champion

Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats

Honorable President Garcìa-Pérez,

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able not only to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems, but also to develop an autonomous  societal system, able to translate, into the society of intelligent machines, the “European way of life” which the Institutions purport to develop.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met.

In particular, we note also that, in  the present Industrial Strategy under discussion,  attention is paid only to SME, whilst, on the contrary, announcements from different parts had hinted at a strategy for European Champions, comparable to the ones of the USA and of China. After the market failures of the ongoing economic crises, worsened by Coronavirus, it had been said that old turbo-liberal prejudices had been overcome, but this reluctancy of European politics to make plans (when everybody in the world makes plans) is suspect.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. I note also that in his interventions in Strasburg, the Pope had warned against “unknown empires”. These empires may be blocked only by a European Web, which the Institutions should  build up according to the models of ESA, Arianespace and Airbus. This herculean work cannot be carried out by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency.

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistency in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

The Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry

Free Alliance  Identity and Democracy Group  

Honorable President Zanni,

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. This herculean work cannot be carried out by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency.

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistency in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

Riccardo Lala

Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32  10125 Torino,  tel 0039011660004  00393357761536  website: http://www.alpinasrl.com

The correrponding Ministry in China

Renew Europe

Turin, 2 June 2020

Honorable President Dacian Ciolos,

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able not only to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems, but also to develop an autonomous  societal system, able to translate, into the society of intelligent machines, the “European way of life” which the Institutions purport to develop.

This is what President Macron means when speaking of “European Digital Sovereignty”.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met.

In particular, we note also that, in  the present Industrial Strategy under discussion,  attention is paid only to SME, whilst, on the contrary, announcements from different parts had hinted at a strategy for European Champions, comparable to the ones of the USA and of China. After the market failures of the ongoing economic crises, worsened by Coronavirus, it had been said that old turbo-liberal prejudices had been overcome, but this reluctancy of European politics to make plans (when everybody in the world makes plans) is suspect.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. empires may be blocked only by a European Web, which the Institutions should  build up according to the models of ESA, Arianespace and Airbus. This herculean work cannot be carried out by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency.

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistency in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

Riccardo Lala

Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32  10125 Torino,  tel 0039011660004  00393357761536  website: http://www.alpinasrl.com

The new Chinese hyperloop

Greens/Free Alliance

Turin, 3 June 2020

Honorable Ska Keller and Philippe Lamberts,

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able not only to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems, but also to develop an autonomous  societal system, able to translate, into the society of intelligent machines, the “European way of life” which the Institutions purport to develop.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met.

In particular, we note also that, in  the present Industrial Strategy under discussion,  attention is paid only to SME, whilst, on the contrary, announcements from different parts had hinted at a strategy for European Champions, comparable to the ones of the USA and of China. After the market failures of the ongoing economic crises, worsened by Coronavirus, it had been said that old turbo-liberal prejudices had been overcome, but this reluctancy of European politics to make plans (when everybody in the world makes plans) is suspect.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. I note also that in his interventions in Strasburg, the Pope had warned against “unknown empires”. These empires may be blocked only by a European Web, which the Institutions should  build up according to the models of ESA, Arianespace and Airbus. This herculean work cannot be carried out by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency.

Also the European New Deal is unrealistic without mastering all AI technologies, because, as Jeremy Rifkin has explained very well, a rational utilisation of energy is based upon an omnipresent form of control, which can be achieved only thanks a widespread presence of digital devices and of powerful control centers, which must not depend from far away multinationals.

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistencies  in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

Riccardo Lala

Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32  10125 Torino,  tel 0039011660004  00393357761536  website: http://www.alpinasrl.com

Rostech, the State-owned holding of the Russian high tech industries

European
Conservatives and Reformists

Turin, 2 June 2020

Honorable Ryszard Antoni Legutko and Raffaele Fitto

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able not only to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems, but also to develop an autonomous  societal system, able to translate, into the society of intelligent machines, the “European way of life” which the Institutions purport to develop.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. empires may be blocked only by a European Web, which the Institutions should  build up according to the models of ESA, Arianespace and Airbus. This herculean work cannot be carried out by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency.

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistency in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

Riccardo Lala

Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32  10125 Torino,  tel 0039011660004  00393357761536  website: http://www.alpinasrl.com

The Chinese quantum satellite, developed in Austria

Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left  

Turin, 3 June 2020

Honorable Manon Aubry and Martin Schirdewan,

We have addressed to the President of the European Parliament, to the members of the ITRE committee and to other members of the EP, as well to the ones of the Council and of the Commission, a letter, which we sent  for urging them, in the course of the present work for approving a series of documents for the 2021-2027 period, to take care of the urgent need to give to Europe, for this period decisive for the future of Mankind, an adequate policy, strategy, structure, funding and legislation, for building up a European Autonomous Digital Ecosystem, able not only to meet successfully the competition of the US and Chinese global systems, but also to develop an autonomous  societal system, able to translate, into the society of intelligent machines, the “European way of life” which the Institutions purport to develop.

We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial  Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020,  is lacking.

We understand that, in March, in the middle of  the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European  Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI, Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely, and no substantive objective will be met. In particular, The role of workers depends on a rational digital policy (see Annex 2).

In particular, we note also that, in  the present Industrial Strategy under discussion,  attention is paid only to SME, whilst, on the contrary, announcements from different parts had hinted at a strategy for European Champions, comparable to the ones of the USA and of China. After the market failures of the ongoing economic crises, worsened by Coronavirus, it had been said that old turbo-liberal prejudices had been overcome, but this reluctancy of European politics to make plans (when everybody in the world makes plans) is suspect.

This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.Especially,the fact of being completely dependent on the OTTs blocks any capability to make an autonomous programming of its technological and geopolitical development, to have an independent intelligence, to have an autonomous R&D and European Army, to develop its own AI. I note also that in his interventions in Strasburg, the Pope had warned against “unknown empires”. These empires may be blocked only by a European Web, which the Institutions should  build up according to the models of ESA, Arianespace and Airbus. This herculean work cannot be carried out by the about 40 small agencies existing today, but only by a powerful European Technology Agency (see Annex 1).

We are confident that the Institutions will take care of these inconsistency in working out the 7 years budget, in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe, but also all the technical documents whose discussion is under way today.

We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.

Thanking you in advance for your attention,

Kindest regards,

For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,

The President,

Riccardo Lala

Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32  10125 Torino,  tel 0039011660004  00393357761536  website: http://www.alpinasrl.com

A quantum computer