Thijs Pepping

This report, the third in the Autopilot series, explores how Europe can rethink its "golden cage" of dependency, and rebuild a technological backbone resilient to external pressure. Key Themes Explored: 1) The Three Gates of Access Denied: Sovereignty is now limited across three critical layers: Systems (the digital kill switch), Markets (the economic lever of tariffs and restrictions), and Culture (the subtle embedding of foreign norms in AI models). 2) Technology as Soft Power: Software and AI are not neutral; they carry the worldview of their creators. The report warns that by adopting IT structures, and specifically AI, organisations risks importing epistemologies that subtly reshape its cultural and democratic processes. 3) Alternatives and European pioneers: which alternatives are out there and which organisations and countries have already taken steps on the Sovereignty spectra? 4) The CIO Sovereignty Agenda. The report provides a practical framework for CIOs to assess mission-critical capabilities and preserve "room to manoeuvre" by designing for replaceability and architectural flexibility.

A quiet but significant transformation is taking place in the way work is done. Not only our tools are changing, but thinking, speaking and creating are merging together. The rise of vibe coding, an AI-driven practice that turns intentions expressed in natural language into functioning designs or code, shows how technology is reshaping the very foundations of work. What began as an experimental tool for developers is now finding its way into many other areas, including marketing, human resource management, consultancy and decision-making. In some situations, a single prompt can produce results that once required several people to plan or execute. This changes not only how work is carried out, but also how it is coordinated, how roles are divided and what it means to be productive. In this report, we examine how this development is unfolding through three scenarios for the future of work. We explore how organisations may be moving towards a form of vibe architecture: an infrastructure of AI systems that do more than merely assist. They contribute original ideas, help build software and sometimes even initiate decisions. Alongside concrete examples, we address the organisational and ethical questions emerging from this shift.

We stand on the threshold of a new era in which artificial intelligence no longer merely supports, but reasons and acts independently. AI agents take over tasks, make decisions, and sometimes appear to operate almost autonomously. The big question is: do we leave this autopilot on, or do we keep our hands on the wheel? In a world where we seem to be losing our grip altogether, the “autopilot on or off” question cannot be answered from a purely technological perspective. Looking at the power play of Big Tech companies, the interests at stake, and the connection with democratic and ecological processes, it becomes crucial to map the broader perspective as well. Understanding both the technology and the culture underlying AI agents is a prerequisite for any IT decision-maker who wants to engage with them.

If you are looking for longer-term footing, this report puts you comfortably in your seat. Feel free to think of a timeframe of 50, 60, possibly even 100 years or more. Let’s take 2125 as a starting point.

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) as ‘the’ new interface can be felt in many organisations. The use of AI for information gathering, also known as ‘prompting’ is becoming more commonly used. Prior knowledge is less important on the work floor as AI tirelessly provides relevant answers. In your organisation, you might see a discord between people who won’t have any of it yet, on one side, and those who fully embrace AI, on the other. With the latter not fully committing as necessary guidelines, or ‘guardrails’, are still in development.

The book by Mary Shelley "Frankenstein, or the modern Prometheus" has inspired many Hollywood scenarios. The fear that is addressed in the book can also be triggered when people are confronted with applications of artificial intelligence. The anatomy of this fear for the artificial, our digital look-alikes, is the starting point for this report. The four FrankensteinFactors we describe provide insight into the underlying question where this fear comes from. The uncanny feeling that robots and automata can raise has been explained by psychoanalysts. Classical psychiatry (such as Sigmund Freud and Ernst Jentsch) and the more modern existential variant (such as Irvin Yalom) both shine an interesting light here. Emotions are explosive material, they should not be ignored. Organizations aware of the FrankensteinFactors increase the likelihood of AI success. Advise from the report: Start the dialogue with the environment (customers and employees), full transparency concerning the functioning of AI-algorithms and make human values central to the AI plans. A recent European resolution and guidelines drawn up by science and industry (Asilomar principles) provide the concrete tools for dealing with this. The report outlines the state of affairs in the current debate on superintelligence (and superstupidity) and unfolds cultural and psychological relationships that explain the fear of AI.