This month’s MIT SMR Strategy Forum asks our panel of experts whether antitrust policy should intervene more decisively to limit the scope of large technology platforms.

There’s very little regulatory oversight for the tech industry, and this has become a problem. The status quo lacks transparency and shuts down competition — while holding no one accountable for breaches of trust. Some want big tech companies broken up. Others want stronger government oversight. They all are trying to answer the same question: What’s the best way to regulate the tech industry so that privacy and ethics concerns are addressed without stifling innovation?

As companies pour resources into designing the next generation of tools and products powered by AI, many are failing to simultaneously examine the question of who is ethically and legally responsible for the societal backlash if these systems go awry. Over 80% of Americans now believe that robots and/or AI should be carefully managed. Because there are no clear-cut answers or solutions, the talk of regulations — and, more lightly, standards — is getting louder.

With a new scrutiny around technology user data and privacy, we must not forget about the potential dangers of the technology itself.

While the threat of national champions is nothing new, their essential character has substantially changed, and the competitive advantage of national champions in the global marketplace has become more pronounced. Today’s national champions are much more sophisticated, competing in more industries, and harder to spot than ever before. As a result, Western companies need a new strategic guide for competing against them.

Digital titans with access to large quantities of data are a challenge to competition. To maintain a competitive business environment, regulation focusing on both market and data dominance needs to be developed. Among the best tools for limiting companies’ influence: data audits.

As the effects of climate change become more prominent, business needs to grapple with its own attitudes toward government. A more destructive physical environment requires a more nuanced relationship in which government is viewed as a partner in enabling and supporting markets rather than as a regulator that needs to be managed.

MIT Sloan School professor Simon Johnson offers an unsettling interpretation of the financial crisis. Also: Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke spoke about the relationship between financial innovation and consumer protection.

Europeans and Americans have traditionally viewed bankruptcy and financial recovery differently. There”s a commitment in the United States to explore options for a “second chance”

For the past two decades, business leaders have focused exclusively on shareholder value. In a time of terrorism and corporate scandal, a much broader vision is imperative, as Yale School of Management Dean Jeffrey E. Garten explains.

Electric utility companies will have to reinvent themselves to change from vertical to “virtual” integration based on value networks segmented into six areas: generation, transmission, distribution, energy services, power markets, and IT products and services.