April 2026 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Digital omnibus e GDPR
by de petra giulio April 22, 2026

April 22, 2026

*Brussels, 21/04/2026 (Agence Europe)* – In their second compromise on the ‘GDPR’ component of the digital simplification package* (see EUROPE **13813/8* <https://agenceurope.eu/en/bulletin/article/13813/8>*)*, dated 15 April and available to *Agence Europe*, the EU27 continue to dismantle the European Commission’s proposals. *Member States are taking an explicit stance against the addition of the new Article 88c to the GDPR, which would authorise the use of personal data to train artificial intelligence models on the grounds of “legitimate interest”.* This stance goes beyond the opinion published by the two European data protection authorities, the EDPB and the EDPS, last February. These bodies had said they were in favour, provided that safeguards were put in place *(see EUROPE **13806/17* <https://agenceurope.eu/en/bulletin/article/13806/17>*).* Article 88a regarding the processing of personal data stored on or originating from end-user devices has been deleted. As for Article 88b, which relates to “*consent fatigue*” and revises the rules on cookies, it has been amended. The possibility of making consent automatic has been somewhat modified by the EU27, who specify that this would only apply “*for specific categories of purposes*”. On the sensitive issue of data pseudonymisation *(see EUROPE **13702/24* <https://agenceurope.eu/en/bulletin/article/13702/24>*)*, the EU Council has added an article, replacing Article 41(a), stating that “*personal data that has undergone pseudonymisation, but which could be attributed to a natural person through the use of additional information, must be considered as information relating to an identifiable natural person*”. They also task the EDPB with issuing an opinion, no later than twelve months after the regulation’s entry into force, on “*the application of pseudonymisation and anonymisation, including related technical and organisational measures, and specifying the means and criteria for determining whether the application of pseudonymisation to personal data is such as to effectively prevent persons other than the controller from identifying a data subject in such a way that, for those persons, the data subject is not or is no longer identifiable*”. *Once again, the Commission’s legal justifications on this issue (see EUROPE**13702/24* <https://agenceurope.eu/en/bulletin/article/13702/24>*) do not appear to have convinced the Member States.* *(Original version in French by Isalia Stieffatre)*

1 0

[Responsible AI] Anticipatory Learning and AI - Working with AI to Reinvent Futures and Foresight
by Daniele Quercia April 21, 2026

April 21, 2026

Anticipatory Learning and AI - Working with AI to Reinvent Futures and Foresight Nicklas Berild Lundblad Join MS Teams<https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/323685154621920?p=uI8oRHMydVoHTSwfwl> Format: 35 min talk + 25 min Q&A Artificial intelligence is more than anything a technology that augments learning of all kinds, including learning about the future. By exploring how we can update old techniques like scenario plannings, predictions, premortems and narrative futures we can make foresight both more accessible and useful. Nicklas Berild Lundblad is an independent writer, researcher and public policy expert, with 20 years experience of leading, building and developing policy functions at companies like Google, Stripe and DeepMind. My interests include foresight, technology, politics, philosophy and science. Subscribe to future talk announcements: Anyone outside Bell Labs can receive talk announcements by subscribing to the mailing list. To subscribe, send an empty email with the subject line "Subscribe RAI” to daniele.quercia(a)polito.it

1 0

Peter Thiel is building a parallel justice system — Powered by AI
by Alberto Cammozzo April 21, 2026

April 21, 2026

<https://www.codastory.com/polarization/can-we-trust-an-ai-jury-to-judge-jou…> Peter Thiel is building a parallel justice system — Powered by AI ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In 2016, when Peter Thiel killed Gawker, he insisted that he wasn’t attacking journalism writ large. On the contrary, he told <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/26/business/dealbook/peter-thiel-tech-billi…> the New York Times, he’d spent $10 million secretly backing Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against the news outlet because: “I saw Gawker pioneer a unique and incredibly damaging way of getting attention by bullying people even when there was no connection with the public interest… if I didn’t think Gawker was unique, I wouldn’t have done any of this. If the entire media was more or less like this, this would be like trying to boil the ocean.” 10 years later with the aid of an “AI tribunal,” a team of intelligence and law enforcement veterans, and a political climate vastly more hostile to press freedom, he is trying to do exactly that, bypassing the courts, short-circuiting the first amendment, and making it much, much cheaper to indulge in the quasi legal harassment of journalists. Objection.ai <http://objection.ai/> is a new startup funded by Thiel, and cofounded by Aron D’Souza, who worked closely with him on the Gawker case. It promises “a fast affordable way to challenge statements in the media.” Anyone can file an objection, which will trigger an investigation by a team hired, the company says, from the CIA, FBI, and British intelligence agencies. Targeted outlets and reporters will have an opportunity to respond, and the results will be fed to an AI model, which will render a verdict. The complainant, and the target, are asked to agree to binding arbitration, with an unspecified range of potential consequences. Financial details are vague, but the company has said the process will cost around $2,000 — far less than the retainer of a crisis communications expert. An initial slate of cases includes objections against the New York Times, for reporting on how Thiel’s fellow traveller David Sacks, former PayPal chief operating officer and Donald Trump’s former “AI and Crypto Czar,” uses <https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/30/technology/david-sacks-white-house-profi…> his White House position to benefit Silicon Valley connections; The Wall Street Journal for its revelations about the doodle contributed <https://www.wsj.com/politics/trump-jeffrey-epstein-birthday-letter-we-have-…> by Donald Trump to Jeffrey Epstein’s birthday book (a case recently dismissed <https://www.wsj.com/business/media/trump-lawsuit-murdoch-dow-jones-epstein-…> by a federal judge); and British reporter Hannah Broughton for an aggregated story in the UK tabloid the Mirror about allegations that Amazon workers were told to continue working while a colleague lay dead on the warehouse floor. A smattering of social media provocateurs (Candace Owens) and politicians (Bernie Sanders) round out the roster, but the aggregate effect is indisputable: Thiel’s animus was about journalism all along. Indeed, the Objection.ai team couldn’t be clearer about that. “Gawker was not unique,” writes <https://objection.ai/about> D’Souza on the company’s website. “It was simply the first large media company to be tested against reality in the age of clicks, outrage, and algorithmic amplification. Since then, the same structural failure has spread everywhere.” “Peter Thiel and I … did not just fight Gawker,” he goes on. “ — We demonstrated that facts still mattered if someone was willing to enforce them.” This is worse than revisionism. D’Souza is banking on everyone having forgotten that the Hulk Hogan case had nothing to do with “reality.” It was undisputed that the sex tape published by Gawker was real. The original suit, which failed, was for copyright infringement and the ultimate $140 million award that bankrupted the company was for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional harm. This foundational lie is important, because it is a warning against the temptation to engage Objection.ai on the merits. It would be easy enough to conduct a good faith debate to take at face value D’Souza’s argument that tech platforms and algorithms amplify false claims to millions, that courts are expensive and slow, media ombuds toothless, and fact-checkers partisan. And it would not be hard to demonstrate that he is harnessing widely shared concerns about a disordered information environment to mobilize support for an AI powered justice system controlled by a hyperpartisan private company with a track record of attacking the very institutions that are holding the line on consensus reality. It would also be a mistake. There is nothing good faith about this effort. Rather, it is classic Thiel: an attempt to hack the principles of accountability, and turn them against journalism. Leave it to his less sophisticated Silicon Valley peers to rail <https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/nyt-david-sacks-anger-allies-21217312.p…> against the media, create <https://www.businessinsider.com/andreessen-horowitz-expands-its-in-houses-m…> in house news outlets or buy <https://www.wired.com/story/openai-acquires-tbpn-buys-positive-news-coverag…> them. The PayPal co-founder is going for the heart of the system, and financing infrastructure that will enable anyone who can afford a used Honda Civic to launch a harassment campaign, cloaked in the language of legitimate investigation. James O’Keefe <https://x.com/JamesOKeefeIII>, but with the judicial rather than journalistic process as its governing metaphor. It will be tempting, too, to question the likely financial sustainability of Objection. That will be the least of its founders’ concerns. The for-profit structure supports a story about the company’s purpose. It may work, or not, but its goals are nonfinancial. We reached out to Thiel for comment on Objection.ai before publication and will update this article as soon as he responds. Providing funding <https://techcrunch.com/2026/04/15/can-ai-judge-journalism-a-thiel-backed-st…>, alongside Thiel, is Balaji Srinivasan, the investor and author of “The Network State,” a book about social networks with “a sense of national consciousness” replacing the nation state. He once outlined <https://www.businessinsider.com/venture-capitalist-balaji-srinivasan-sugges…> an early version of the Objection.ai model in an email to the far right theorist Curtis Yarvin about dealing with critical coverage. “If things get hot,” he suggested “it may be interesting to sic the Dark Enlightenment audience on a single vulnerable hostile reporter to dox them and turn them inside out with hostile reporting sent to *their* advertisers/friends/contacts.” These men understand the limits of the Gawker verdict’s impact. It bankrupted the company, a personal victory for Thiel, but perhaps the least important outcome of the case. At a more systemic level, it struck fear into the hearts of media insurers and newsroom counsel, focusing attention on third party litigation finance as potential threat. If people with limitless resources could sponsor litigation against news organizations they disliked, constitutional protections would be no match for the sheer cost and complexity of defense. Now, they’ve found an AI-assisted way to supercharge those effects. The Gawker case routed around the First Amendment by relying on a privacy claim. Objection.ai does so by building a hallucination of the legal process. Any journalist foolish enough to agree to binding arbitration by the company probably deserves what they get, but that will be a vanishingly small minority. For those who don’t, a phone call, or a knock on the door from a former FBI agent, or defense intelligence operative, will be chilling, and an ex-parte verdict rendered by Thiel’s custom-tuned AI will act as a cudgel on social media and via traditional PR. Journalists will be assigned a “trust score” to act as an additional goad. In an environment of less peril for press freedom, it might be easy to laugh off Objection.ai as the confection of a thin-skinned millenarian. Right now, with the crony capture of broadcast news far advanced, swathes of the tech community openly hostile to journalism, and the White House onside, it would be wise to take it seriously. That starts with seeing it for what it is, and refusing to engage with a process which, unlike the real courts, Peter Thiel has no legal power to compel.

1 0

Fwd: PhD Supervision
by maurizio lana April 20, 2026

April 20, 2026

sono stato contattato da Tumpale Mwakasangula, assistant lecturer of Information Studies at the Water Institute, in Dar Es Salaam Tanzania. mi ha chiesto se sono disposto ad essere il suo PhD research supervisor, e chiede se sarei disposto ad accoglierla come visiting researcher per una Scholarship grant del MAECI (Ministero degli Affari Esteri e della Cooperazione Internazionale). il periodo dentro cui si deve collocare il MAECI grant è fra Novembre 2026 e Luglio 2027. mi ha cercato perché insegno scienza della biblioteca e dell'informazione, in cui pure lei è laureata, ma il tema della ricerca che vorrebbe sviluppare, come si vede qui sotto, non è da scienza della biblioteca e io tra qualche mese vado in pensione. qualcuno che legge il messaggio potrebbe essere interessata/o e disponibile a raccogliere la richiesta/proposta? Maurizio -------- Messaggio Inoltrato -------- Oggetto: PhD Supervision Data: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 17:51:16 +0300 Mittente: Tumpale Mwakasangula <tumpalemwakasangula(a)gmail.com> A: maurizio.lana(a)uniupo.it <maurizio.lana(a)uniupo.it> Dear professor, Greetings from Tanzania Thank you so much for answering my yesterday email on time. I sincerely understand the fact that you will be retiring later this year. Congratulations Professor. Following your previous reply and after further reflection on the scope of my research, I am writing to share a revised research focus and hereby kindly request you (If possible) to give me your suggestions and direct me to a new professor who will guide me on the new title and focus. My research will now focus on: *Designing an Integrated Information Management Framework to Link Health Records and Water/Sanitation Infrastructure Data for Enhanced Cholera Outbreak Control in Vingunguti Ward, Dar es Salaam * The core problem identified is the fragmentation of critical information. Health facilities hold patient data, while municipal offices and DAWASA hold separate data on water and sanitation infrastructure. These datasets currently exist in isolation, resulting in delayed response and poor preventive planning. My study will therefore design an administrative framework to link these existing datasets for timely and targeted cholera control. Vingunguti area is characterized as a low -income informal urban settlement and is documented as recurrent cholera hotspot This approach is firmly grounded in Library and Information Science, as it addresses a systemic information management problem the broken flow of information between units The study will not develop software or provide treatment, but will produce a validated protocol for routine, evidence-based decision making. Thank you for your continued mentorship. Regards, Tumpale Alfred Mwakasangula Assistant Lecturer- Information Studies Water Institute-Dar Es Salaam ------------------------------------------------------------------------ if we spent on prosecuting the rich just one-tenth of the effort we spend prosecuting the poor it would be a very different world bruce schneier ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maurizio Lana Università del Piemonte Orientale Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici Piazza Roma 36 - 13100 Vercelli

1 0

Segnalazioni: Fondazione Basso (le guerre e noi) e Sapienza-Economia
by Dario Guarascio April 20, 2026

April 20, 2026

Cari Nexiani (soprattutto romani), segnalo il ciclo 'Le guerre e noi' co-organizzato dalla Fondazione Basso e dalla Sapienza - programma molto ricco con interventi, tra gli altri, di Betti, Cruciati, De Petra, Foa, Pianta, Rivetti, Strazzari e molti altri - e la presentazioni di imperialismo digitale il 5 maggio (ore 17) alla Sapienza con interventi di Diletti, Franzini, Pieranni e Rosselli. Diffondete pure! A presto, Dario -- *Dario Guarascio* Dipartimento di Economia e Diritto, Sapienza Università di Roma <http://www.uniroma1.it/strutture/dipartimenti> Via del Castro Laurenziano n° 9, 00161 Roma Edificio A (6° piano) -ala B, stanza n° 606 E-mail: dario.guarascio(a)uniroma1.it <nome.cognome(a)uniroma1.it> *Sito web* italiano - https://sites.google.com/a/uniroma1.it/darioguarascio/ inglese - https://sites.google.com/a/uniroma1.it/darioguarascio-eng/ -- *Fai crescere le giovani ricercatrici e i giovani ricercatori*** *con il 5 per mille alla Sapienza* Scrivi il codice fiscale dell'Università *80209930587 **Cinque per mille <https://www.uniroma1.it/it/node/23149>*

1 0

[ERRATA CORRIGE] MEMENTO | 130° Nexa Lunch Seminar | 29 aprile 2026
by Nexa - Media April 20, 2026

April 20, 2026

Gentilissime, gentilissimi, Vi ricordiamo che mercoledì 29 aprile, dalle ore 13.00 alle ore 14.00, si terrà il 130° Nexa Lunch Seminar con un incontro dal titolo "Cloud pubblici e stack sovrani? Gli sviluppi della sovranità digitale in America Latina". Ospite dell'incontro: Gianmarco Cristofari (Università di Amsterdam). L'incontro si terrà IN PRESENZA e ONLINE. SEDE FISICA dell'incontro: Centro Nexa su Internet e Società, Politecnico di Torino, Via Boggio 65/a, Torino (1° piano). Per accedere alla sala si raccomanda di suonare al citofono Portineria e di seguire le indicazioni segnalate lungo il percorso. QUI<https://nexa.polito.it/contatti> maggiori informazioni su come raggiungerci. STANZA VIRTUALE dell'incontro: https://didattica.polito.it/VClass/NexaEvent Maggiori informazioni alla pagina: https://nexa.polito.it/lunch-130 Un saluto cordiale, -- Valeria Bergantino Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society<web:%20https://nexa.polito.it> DAUIN - Politecnico di Torino Via Pier Carlo Boggio, 65/a – Torino Digital Communication Assistant DAUIN - Politecnico di Torino<https://www.dauin.polito.it> Corso Castelfidardo 34/D - Torino mail: valeria.bergantino(a)polito.it<mailto:valeria.bergantino@polito.it> tel: 3473443585

1 0

MEMENTO | 130° Nexa Lunch Seminar | 22 aprile 2026, ore 13.00
by Nexa - Media April 20, 2026

April 20, 2026

Gentilissime, gentilissimi, Vi ricordiamo che mercoledì 22 aprile, dalle ore 13.00 alle ore 14.00, si terrà il 130° Nexa Lunch Seminar con un incontro dal titolo "Cloud pubblici e stack sovrani? Gli sviluppi della sovranità digitale in America Latina". Ospite dell'incontro: Gianmarco Cristofari (Università di Amsterdam). L'incontro si terrà IN PRESENZA e ONLINE. SEDE FISICA dell'incontro: Centro Nexa su Internet e Società, Politecnico di Torino, Via Boggio 65/a, Torino (1° piano). Per accedere alla sala si raccomanda di suonare al citofono Portineria e di seguire le indicazioni segnalate lungo il percorso. QUI<https://nexa.polito.it/contatti> maggiori informazioni su come raggiungerci. STANZA VIRTUALE dell'incontro: https://didattica.polito.it/VClass/NexaEvent Maggiori informazioni alla pagina: https://nexa.polito.it/lunch-130 Un saluto cordiale, -- Valeria Bergantino Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society<web:%20https://nexa.polito.it> DAUIN - Politecnico di Torino Via Pier Carlo Boggio, 65/a – Torino Digital Communication Assistant DAUIN - Politecnico di Torino<https://www.dauin.polito.it> Corso Castelfidardo 34/D - Torino mail: valeria.bergantino(a)polito.it<mailto:valeria.bergantino@polito.it> tel: 3473443585

1 0

PRIN 2026, call for interessati
by Andrea Trentini April 18, 2026

April 18, 2026

Ciao, stiamo (unimi, unilink, forse unimore) valutando di partecipare al PRIN 2026 con un progetto che dovrebbe collegare i seguenti: - cittadinanza digitale - relatività della rete - fake news - deep fake - manipolazione dell'informazione - uso politico della religione e della storia (es. motivare guerre) - teorie cospirazioniste - (ovviamente) IA C'è in lista qualcuno di altre università o centri di ricerca (eligible) che voglia provare a partecipare al progetto? Grazie -- Andrea Trentini ⠠⠵ - http://atrent.it - public key ID: 0xA7A91E3B - Dip.to di Informatica - Università degli Studi di Milano Cittadinanza Digitale e Tecnocivismo: 1) https://www.ledizioni.it/prodotto/cittadinanza-digitale-tecnocivismo 2) https://edizionithemis.it/catalogo/digitale-e-societa/dal-tecnocivismo-alla…

1 0

Ursula von der Leyen "Non ci sono più scuse"
by Eleonora Panto April 17, 2026

April 17, 2026

la app europea per la verifica dell'età non sembra cosi' solida https://cybernews.com/security/eu-age-verification-app-hack/ qualcuno ne sa di più? -- ================================================= Eleonora Pantò - +39 377 3567615 Lapilli <https://eleonorapanto.substack.com/> è la mia newsletter su educazione e digitale www.associazionedschola.it - www.openeducationitalia.it www.puntopanto.it |

4 3

De Stefano, "Silicon Valley’s Anti-Democratic Turn Begins at Work"
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 17, 2026

April 17, 2026

*Silicon Valley’s Anti-Democratic Turn Begins at Work * /Silicon Valley's quarrel with democracy is not abstract — it begins in the workplace, where unilateral authority is normalised. / Valerio De Stefano 16th April 2026 Peter Thiel’s recent private lecture series in Rome on the Antichrist <https://www.reuters.com/technology/thiels-secretive-rome-conference-draws-c…> should not be dismissed as another exercise in billionaire eccentricity. In unusually stark form, it condensed a worldview that is gaining influence across parts of Silicon Valley, the American right and sectors of the European far right as well. Thiel routinely invokes the spectre of a one-world government — one capable of regulating artificial intelligence or tackling climate change — as “the Antichrist”, a framing that casts democratic restraint and supranational authority as existential threats while elevating exceptional elites as the true bearers of freedom. The Rome lectures were revealing not as a cultural curiosity but as a symptom of a broader political convergence. This became especially clear at the end of last year. Around the same time that Elon Musk escalated his attacks on the European Union after regulatory action against X, and even called for the Union’s abolition <https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-threatens-response-against-indivi…>, the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy denounced the EU as anti-democratic and declared that the United States should help Europe “correct its current trajectory <https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-strategy-document-says-europe-r…>“. What is at stake here goes well beyond a disagreement over digital-market regulation or a diplomatic quarrel. It is a struggle over private power and, more specifically, over who gets to govern the deployment of technology in our societies. As I argued in a recent keynote for FES – Future of Work <https://futureofwork.fes.de/news-list/e/labour-law-technology-and-the-attac…>, nowhere are the stakes of this confrontation between technology and democracy more visible than in the workplace: in the employment relationship, in managerial prerogative, and in the legal institutions that determine whether workers remain citizens at work or are reduced to subjects of command. [...] continua qui: https://www.socialeurope.eu/silicon-valleys-anti-democratic-turn-begins-at-…

1 0