ImaginareaDaily
Artificial Intelligence: A User’s Guide
Mario De Caro is one of Italy’s leading scholars in AI ethics. A philosopher and Professor of Moral Philosophy at the University of Rome Tre, where he holds the UNESCO Chair in Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and Practical Wisdom, and a Visiting Professor at Tufts University in the United States, he has long explored the relationship between mind, technology and society. Starting from the origins of the “mechanisation of thought”, he explains how AI has already reshaped our cognitive paradigms, the risks posed by the recent rise of agentic AI, and why collective policies and regulations are needed.
When did the idea of mechanising thought first emerge?
Philosophers such as Pascal and Leibniz had already envisioned systems capable of carrying out reasoning through mechanical processes. The real turning point came in 1956, at the Dartmouth Conference, where the term “artificial intelligence” was officially coined. The original idea was to represent all human knowledge symbolically and apply logical rules to infer new information. It was a rule-based form of AI, grounded in deductive reasoning.
What distinguishes today’s AI from its earliest forms?
The difference is profound. Early AI systems followed predefined rules: they started from axioms and produced logical consequences. Today’s systems, by contrast, are data-driven and learn from experience. The decisive shift came in 2017 with the development of new neural network architectures and Large Language Models (LLMs). Rather than operating sequentially, these models process vast amounts of data in parallel, identifying patterns and probabilities.
In this sense, AI reasons abductively: it generates the most plausible hypothesis based on the available data. This is a form of reasoning often used in science. Darwin, for example, developed the theory of evolution by connecting phenomena that initially appeared unrelated. Abductive reasoning is powerful because it can generate innovation, but it also carries risks: its conclusions are never certain.
Do Large Language Models truly understand language?
The most advanced systems display increasingly sophisticated forms of functional understanding. They can generate text, images, music and even creative solutions in ways that are often indistinguishable from those produced by humans. We are no longer dealing with merely advanced calculators. Systems such as AlphaZero have demonstrated remarkable strategic and creative capabilities, learning autonomously through trial and error.
Can we speak of conscious artificial intelligence?
Scholars remain divided on the issue: some believe it may be possible, while others reject the idea entirely. The crucial point, however, is that AI can be highly powerful—and potentially dangerous—even without consciousness. Today’s systems are inherently indeterministic: we cannot fully predict their behaviour, nor can we always understand how they arrive at a particular decision. Agentic AI goes beyond simply responding to prompts. It can make decisions, plan actions and operate autonomously. This creates enormous opportunities, but also significant risks, as such systems are already being deployed in strategic domains including finance, healthcare, public administration and defence.
What are likely to be the next major areas of application?
Medicine is likely to be the field where we will see the most significant impact. AI is already accelerating both diagnostics and pharmaceutical research. But its applications extend across virtually every sector: the creative industries, logistics, financial services and education, to name just a few.
The challenge is that these systems are often opaque: they work, yet we cannot always explain precisely why they produce certain outcomes. This is the issue of explainability. In a sense, both humans and machines are opaque systems. AI generates solutions through internal processes that are difficult to decipher, just as we do not fully understand the deeper motivations behind our own behaviour, often constructing rational explanations only after the fact. Yet it is precisely from the interaction between these two forms of opacity that some of the most interesting results may emerge.
At the same time, significant risks remain, including the erosion of critical autonomy, information manipulation and algorithmic discrimination. AI can amplify dynamics already present in social media, such as polarisation and echo chambers. There is also the problem of “hallucinations” — outputs that are false, yet highly plausible.
What impact will AI have on the creative disciplines?
Artificial intelligence can generate images, music and texts that are often indistinguishable from those created by humans. There have been instances in which poems produced by ChatGPT were mistaken for the work of renowned authors and were even highly rated by readers.
We are not yet talking about the radical creativity of a Shakespeare or a Caravaggio, but rather about a form of “everyday” or “average” creativity that these systems have already demonstrated they can achieve. For this reason, it is essential to study how such systems work in order to develop a critical and genuinely human perspective, grounded in the capacity for judgement—the ability to recognise when something may appear convincing or correct, yet ultimately fails to hold up under closer scrutiny.
What will the impact be on the brand identity sector? Where will the value of creative agencies lie?
Interaction is the way forward. AI is an extraordinarily powerful tool, but it will not replace creative professionals. The added value of creative agencies will lie in their ability to integrate and harmonise these technologies within organisational processes, acting as a critical interface between artificial systems and the ways they are actually deployed and used.
Today, there is growing demand for this kind of strategic guidance. Ultimately, machines can stimulate and enhance creativity, even within corporate decision-making processes. Yet understanding how to make this happen in practice is far from straightforward. What we are facing is an entirely new anthropological and operational paradigm—one that requires not only technological expertise, but also judgement, interpretation and a deep understanding of human behaviour.
How can we govern artificial intelligence? Are the current regulations sufficient?
No. The European AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) is an important first step, but it is not enough. What is needed are international frameworks and, above all, systems designed with intrinsic ethical safeguards—an approach often referred to as “ethics by design”.
Most importantly, effective governance requires collaboration between policymakers, the scientific community and civil society. The challenge is not to halt the development of artificial intelligence, but to ensure that autonomous, opaque and unpredictable systems do not operate without limits or meaningful human oversight. The goal is to govern AI through democratic principles, clear rules and transparency.
From Products to People: The Long Journey of Brand Design
Il Sole 24 Ore – Sunday, June 14, 2026
An article by Antonio Romano.
Between the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, brands did not yet know they were brands. They were labels displaying the name of the product and its manufacturer. Their primary function was simply to distinguish one product from another. Yet it took only ornate lettering and a few decorative elements to create an unexpected effect: the label became the product’s memory, giving rise to the earliest form of customer loyalty.
The evolution of branding has been built upon this premise. The contemporary brand bears little direct resemblance to its original label. Today, it is a promise of value that extends beyond the logo and beyond the act of selling, shaping experiences, building communities, and fostering a sense of belonging. A brand signals something intangible, something that engages and remains connected with its various audiences in order to create its own world. This seems to be its true purpose: shifting the focus from “what we do” to “why we are here.”
It is therefore clear that design, in all its forms, is the most effective means of representing a brand’s universe. Whether rational or emotional, design becomes a non-verbal language capable of generating impact and, in turn, fostering empathy, trust, and authority among diverse audiences.
All of this happens in a remarkably short span of time, reflecting the limited attention available to twenty-first-century individuals, immersed as they are in an overcrowded communication landscape, both physical and digital.
It is precisely this historical context that has shaped some of the defining characteristics of contemporary branding. The internet changed everything. By removing physical and geographical barriers, the web triggered an exponential growth in the number of brands present in our daily lives: today, more than 93 million trademarks are registered worldwide (WIPO, 2024).
A glance at Amazon’s homepage or an Instagram feed is enough to understand the scale of this phenomenon. As a result, brands are compelled to pursue greater simplicity in their representation in order to reach audiences instantly. Fewer messages and fewer visual elements are required to communicate more powerfully, especially within the limited space of a smartphone screen.
The internet, and social media in particular, has also broken down the barriers between people, creating the illusion of greater proximity and placing individuals at the center of the conversation. The spotlight, once occupied by the product, now belongs to the person. Brands are engaged in a continuous dialogue with their audiences, striving to understand, involve, and persuade them.
As a result, community has come to prevail over individuality, with significant implications for the design of brand identity itself. It is no longer enough to endlessly replicate a logo, nor is it useful to mark every asset belonging to an organization. What matters today is making visible the world to which that organization aspires to belong and the values with which it chooses to identify.
Another aspect, closely related to this shift, concerns algorithmic systems and artificial intelligence, both of which have restored the primacy of language over the visual dimension that dominated the twentieth century. Before encountering a logo, we now enter a brand’s world through words: the words we use to describe what we seek to search engines and AI systems, and the words that, through a name, identify the entity that responds to that request.
In this sense, the brand returns to being a symbol in its original meaning: an object divided into two parts that, once reunited, generates recognition. From this encounter, a story emerges. The symbol becomes a myth—that is, a narrative rich in meaning and values. The brand thus rediscovers the essence of the term mythos: originally meaning “word,” then increasingly “story,” until arriving at its contemporary sense of a “memorable reality.”
Another aspect, closely related to this shift, concerns algorithmic systems and artificial intelligence, both of which have restored the primacy of language over the visual dimension that dominated the twentieth century. Before encountering a logo, we now enter a brand’s world through words: the words we use to describe what we seek to search engines and AI systems, and the words that, through a name, identify the entity that responds to that request.
In this sense, the brand returns to being a symbol in its original meaning: an object divided into two parts that, once reunited, generates recognition. From this encounter, a story emerges. The symbol becomes a myth—that is, a narrative rich in meaning and values. The brand thus rediscovers the essence of the term mythos: originally meaning “word,” then increasingly “story,” until arriving at its contemporary sense of a “memorable reality.”
Ultimately, the contemporary brand brings together the visible and the invisible. Building its representation is no longer solely an act of design; it is the outcome of a process that integrates research, analysis, and strategy to understand what a brand can say and how it can say it authentically.
Design itself extends beyond the visual dimension, embracing sound and scent as well, because engagement increasingly unfolds on a multisensory level. The brand experience is no longer confined to what people see, but encompasses what they hear, feel, and remember.
For a Peaceful 1 May
“The Third World War fought in fragments.” This is how the sum of ongoing conflicts has been described—the highest number ever recorded since the end of World War II.
There are currently 56 situations of armed conflict, involving 92 countries. They have led to the displacement of over 100 million people, and in 2024 the number of casualties reached a tragic record: more than 230,000 lives lost.
It is this discouraging tally that led us to revisit an image we created thirty-two years ago to mark the Peaceful May Day in Sarajevo, a city that became a symbol of the war in the former Yugoslavia. The image was commissioned by the European Trade Union Confederation, which, with the support of the United Nations, had organized the event.
The meaning of the celebration is as simple as it is profound: peace and work are inseparable values.
The image depicts a bricklayer’s trowel in the act of sealing the crack of a bombed wall, while at the same time giving shape to a dove. The symbol of peace thus becomes a symbol of reconstruction—and therefore of work.
Happy 1 May!
The value of consistency
The rebranding of a law firm is a moment of identity synthesis, strategic alignment, and redefinition of its relationship with clients and the market. In the case of Improda, entrusted to Inarea, the process stems from an internal evolution of the firm and develops into a broader reflection on communication, consistency, and trust.
We discuss this with Alberto Improda, founder of Improda Studio Legale, a firm active for over thirty years and now structured as a multidisciplinary group serving businesses.
What needs led you to the rebranding?
The need stemmed from a very concrete step: at the beginning of 2025, we expanded the partnership by bringing in professionals who had been working with us for years. It was a moment of natural growth, but also a symbolic one, and we felt the need to visually represent this new phase.
Alongside this, there was a more structural need: over the years, the firm had evolved into a complex group, complementing its legal practice with business advisory services. However, this growth had taken place unevenly, with different visual identities. The rebranding therefore became an opportunity to create a unified and coherent image for entities that, while working together, presented themselves in a misaligned way.
Rebranding is a process of synthesis: what did you learn from revisiting your identity?
It was far more complex than I had imagined. I initially thought it would be a purely technical intervention, but it turned into a true process of introspection. The dialogue—both internal and with Inarea’s professionals—led us to articulate values and visions that we had never fully clarified before.
Differences in perspective also emerged: on one side, more traditional approaches; on the other, more innovative views. The goal was not to find a compromise, but an authentic synthesis. The final outcome—a master brand capable of bringing together legal practice and advisory services—reflects this awareness: we are a single entity, with different yet integrated competencies.
How important is it to manage a law firm’s image in a coherent and strategic way?
It is essential. The rebranding helped us not only present ourselves more effectively, but also work more efficiently. Previously, when a client required services beyond strictly legal ones, the transition to our advisory company could create uncertainty. Today, thanks to a unified identity, this transition feels natural.
At the same time, we chose to rely on professionals for managing our communication, particularly on social media. Here as well, the key word is consistency: gradual growth, without shortcuts, in full respect of the firm’s reputation.
What does it mean to build trust in a law firm through branding?
Trust is central—it always has been in the legal profession, and today it is also a key element of branding. Trust is built through consistency: if a brand makes a promise, it must uphold it over time. This is what makes a firm credible in the eyes of its clients.
Looking at recent cases, it is clear how the perception of consistency—or inconsistency—can make a decisive difference. For a law firm, this means aligning communication, values, and professional conduct. The brand is not a superficial layer; it is the visible expression of what the firm truly is.
Dear Friends,
Since 1980, passion for this profession has always been our greatest asset. It is a passion that rewards hard work and, at times, is itself rewarded: I have been honoured with the Compasso d’Oro Career Achievement Award, the highest recognition in Italian design.
This award symbolically embraces my entire professional journey and invites me to reflect on fifty years of my life through the brands created for companies, industrial groups and institutions. Many of these projects have become part of our collective memory, yet every one of them is the result of a shared effort.
I have always considered Inarea a community before a company, and it is this spirit that has given depth to the relationships built with colleagues, partners, suppliers, clients and friends throughout this long journey. They are the people with whom I wish to share this recognition, and to whom I extend my heartfelt gratitude for their unwavering support.
Thank you once again, and my warmest regards.
Antonio Romano
Law Firm: the silent revolution
The evolution of law firms is unfolding rapidly and profoundly through the integration of new organizational models, technological innovation, and increasingly complex market dynamics. In this context, branding becomes a strategic tool to redefine the identity and positioning of law firms. We discuss this with Mario Suglia, for a cross-disciplinary perspective spanning law and the design of relationships.
What have law firms evolved into today?
Today, lawyers are increasingly acting as advisors—proactive figures able to anticipate scenarios and guide clients through strategic legal decisions. This shift in role is accompanied by a decisive factor: technology. Through the systematic integration of tools such as artificial intelligence, law firms are becoming “service platforms” where people and technologies coexist, reshaping processes and capabilities.
At the same time, multidisciplinarity is growing. Lawyers are no longer “isolated” professionals; depending on the area of work, they engage and collaborate with other disciplines—from tax to business advisory. This hybridization naturally leads to aggregation: firms tend to merge and evolve into complex organizations, often structured as corporate entities (STAs—lawyer companies), in order to respond to increasing market complexity.
Today, it is difficult to imagine a solo practitioner remaining competitive. The collective dimension becomes a strategic asset, enabling integrated expertise and greater organizational strength.
How does this evolution connect with branding dynamics?
The key shift is from the individual—where each professional now has their own personal brand—to the group, the firm, and therefore corporate branding. Traditionally, the focus has been on the individual lawyer. Today, especially in corporate contexts, the emphasis is increasingly on the firm itself. This reflects a change in client expectations: not so much a search for individual excellence, but for structures capable of managing complexity.
A law firm’s brand thus becomes the synthesis of a promise: the ability to be reliable, competent, and consistent over time. In this phase of significant transition, it is essential to define the right balance between the master brand—the firm—and the surnames of the individual lawyers who compose it. It is the primary, collective brand that generates trust and builds reputation. This marks a deep cultural shift, still unfolding but ultimately irreversible.
How important is naming for a law firm today?
This aspect, too, is undergoing a crucial shift, marking—also symbolically—the move beyond the traditional model tied to the founders’ surnames. Increasingly, firms are choosing names or acronyms that are independent from individuals and capable of expressing a distinct, enduring identity.
This does not mean diminishing the value of founders or individuals, but rather redefining their role within a broader system. The name thus becomes an element of synthesis and vision: it must be recognizable, distinctive, and aligned with the firm’s positioning. It is a delicate balance, especially in this transitional phase where elements of personal and corporate branding still coexist.
What are the tools of brand identity for law firms today?
Branding now has a multidimensional nature. It is no longer limited to the logo or visual identity, but extends across multiple sensory and relational levels. The visual dimension—and its expression in digital environments, from the website to online communication—remains fundamental, yet new sensory languages are emerging.
For example, olfactory branding is becoming increasingly relevant for law firms, shaping physical spaces as a distinctive element of brand recognition. Similarly, brand languages translated into interior design contribute to building a coherent experience. In addition, firms can leverage sound—through sonic logos and musical themes—as a distinctive marker.
More broadly, branding takes form through consistent moments of interaction that build relationships and reinforce the perception of the law firm.
In essence, design helps make the law more usable, useful, and understandable. Law firms, as active players in its application, are becoming increasingly aware of this in the way they build relationships with their clients.