If predatory pricing is effective, an algorithm can be taught, or learn to, exploit it if fed with the right data.
This, quite obviously, shouldn't change anything regarding the potential legality, as it's entirely self evident that a sufficiently powerful machine learning algorithm will exploit any patterns not expressly forbidden.
As always, the responsibility for following the laws, and making sure these extensions of our own agency we call machines also follow the same laws fall on whomever is making the machine act in their stead.
One can however be assured that several companies will argue otherwise, argue as if they were simply a victim of some sort. Which might be true in a sense. Victims of their own devices, both figuratively and almost literally at the same time.
“A slightly more grey area arises where, with no human involvement or instruction, a price-setting AI algorithm teaches itself to coordinate with competitors – otherwise referred to as tacit algorithmic collusion. While it is unclear the extent to which current AI technology allows for this tacit coordination, a 2018 University of Bologna study found that if two competitors both employ pricing algorithms, and each gives its software total autonomy to set prices, those two algorithms would reach collusive, price-fixing arrangements more often than not.”
How does it come about that that is that a concept?
Does the thought go something like: "We neglected to instruct the algorithm not to collude, and failed to monitor outcomes for collusion, therefore we're not responsible?"
> and each gives its software total autonomy to set prices
If predatory pricing is effective, an algorithm can be taught, or learn to, exploit it if fed with the right data.
This, quite obviously, shouldn't change anything regarding the potential legality, as it's entirely self evident that a sufficiently powerful machine learning algorithm will exploit any patterns not expressly forbidden.
As always, the responsibility for following the laws, and making sure these extensions of our own agency we call machines also follow the same laws fall on whomever is making the machine act in their stead.
One can however be assured that several companies will argue otherwise, argue as if they were simply a victim of some sort. Which might be true in a sense. Victims of their own devices, both figuratively and almost literally at the same time.