Congress seems to be in a mad rush to regulate artificial intelligence, determined not to repeat what many legislators see as the mistake of letting social media run amok. But while AI-related headlines focus on doomsday scenarios like civilizational destruction and job loss, less attention is paid to the potential for AI to transform how our government operates. It would be an understatement to say our government could use some modernization, but can a Congress so bent on regulating AI also embrace the technology for its own purposes? Joining Evan is Luke Hogg, Director of Outreach at Foundation for American Innovation. You can read his piece in Tech Policy Press, “Artificial Intelligence Could Democratize Government.” And check out other work from FAI scholars on this topic, including this piece by Zach Graves.

Elon Musk has called himself a “free speech absolutist,” but a recent decision to censor certain content on Twitter ahead of an election casts doubt on the validity of that moniker. Musk argues that it’s better to comply with the Turkish government’s requests than see the platform shut off in Turkey entirely. Skeptics say Musk should’ve denied the requests, and, if President Erdoghan shut down Twitter, it would prove he is an authoritarian, which could help inform voters as the head to the polls. What can we learn from this dustup and Twitter’s handling of government requests more broadly? Evan is joined by Nathan Leamer, Executive Director of Digital First Project, a tech policy organization. You can read his chapter in “The Digital Public Square” here.

Almost everyone agrees that an Internet connection is essential for full participation in modern American life. That’s why our government is spending huge sums to build networks in rural areas and help low-income Americans pay their bills or connect for free. As the burden increases on taxpayers, is it time to rethink how we subsidize broadband? Should Big Tech companies like Google, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft help foot the bill for the infrastructure needed to use their services? Or should Americans pay additional fees on their Internet bill to help other Americans get online? What other business models might help pay for infrastructure going forward? 

Evan is joined by Roslyn Layton, Senior Vice President of Strand Consult and visiting researcher at Aalborg University. She is also a nonresident senior fellow at Foundation for American Innovation. You can read her report on broadband cost recovery and her other work at StrandConsult.dk. You can check out the Sandvine report on Internet traffic referenced on the episode here.

While it didn’t get the attention of the Edward Snowden leaks, a recent dump of classified information on a video game chat server has been described as one of the worst Western intelligence failures in modern memory. Analysts say the leak could complicate Ukraine’s spring offensive against Russia and expose U.S. assets in the Kremlin, among other potential ramifications. What makes this leak unique is that it doesn’t appear to be driven by ideology or a foreign adversary, but rather the suspect’s desire to impress his online gamer buddies. 

Is “clout chasing” a growing threat to national security? How can these leaks be prevented and what policies should the U.S. government change or implement in response? Evan is joined by Jon Askonas, Assistant Professor of Politics at Catholic University and a non-resident senior fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation. Read his piece, co-authored with Stanford Internet Observatory's Renee DiResta, in Foreign Policy on the threat gamers pose to national intelligence and check out his ongoing series in The New Atlantis on the collapse of consensus reality.

Politicians gripe constantly about Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, and their ilk. Two years ago, then-CEO of Twitter Jack Dorsey pitched Congress that a lot of their complaints could be solved by his project called “Bluesky,” which aims to decentralize social media. The app is now available on iPhone and Android, and hundreds of thousands of users are trying it out. Can we learn any initial lessons from Bluesky? Are decentralized protocols the silver bullet to the endless debates over content moderation and online censorship? Is it really possible for social media to be “owned” by its users? Evan is joined by Paul Bohm, a distributed systems engineer and founder and CEO of Teleport.XYZ. You can read Paul’s blog post on Bluesky here.

Evan interviews Foundation for American's COO Grace Meyer on Lincoln Network's rebrand to the Foundation for American Innovation. 

Check out our new website here. And don't forget to follow us on Twitter! 

Artificial intelligence is all the rage these days. The large language model ChatGPT reached over 100 million users in record time, and AI is growing more accessible and relevant for everyday consumers. While many are cheering the AI revolution and heralding a brighter future, others are sounding the alarm. Elon Musk has warned AI could spell “civilizational destruction” without proper safety protocols. Is AI moving too fast, or is this the pace of innovation our economy needs? What should policymakers do, if anything, to tackle the challenges posed by AI? Evan is joined by Sam Hammond, Senior Economist at Lincoln Network.

• “Polluting the agentic commons,” a piece by Sam on what happens when chat agents go viral
• “Before the Flood,” a piece by Sam on the future of AI

As the headaches for TikTok pile up in Washington, the embattled social media platform and its supporters are arguing that a ban on the app would violate the U.S. Constitution, particularly the First Amendment. TikTok’s critics counter that the national security problems posed by the company's Chinese ownership far outweigh free speech concerns. Which side holds the upper hand, and what can we learn from past court cases involving a pornographic bookstore and a North Carolina law regarding sex offenders on social media? Evan is joined by Joel Thayer, president of Digital Progress Institute.

References
Joel’s piece for FedSoc, “Banning TikTok Outright Would Be Constitutional”
Dan Lyon’s piece for American Enterprise Institute, “Would a TikTok Ban Be Constitutional?”
Statement from the American Civil Lberties Union opposing a TikTok ban

In a prior episode, Gabriela Rodriguez of American Compass argued that the Jones Act, a law aimed at supporting the U.S. ship building should be reformed—not repealed. On The Dynamist’s first ever “rebuttal episode,” Evan is joined by Colin Grabow, a research fellow at the Cato Institute’s Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies. They discuss why Grabow supports a full repeal of the Jones Act, his response to Rodriguez’s proposed reforms, and what a post-Jones Act world might look like. 

Cato blog, “More Industrial Policy Won’t Solve the Jones Act’s Many Problems”

Op-ed in The Atlantic, “The Obscure Maritime Law That Ruins Your Commute”

Last week, TikTok CEO Shou Chew appeared before the House Energy and Commerce Committee for a marathon hearing focused on national security and other concerns with the popular social media app. His goal was to assuage lawmakers’ concerns, but, if anything, the app’s future in the United States looks more bleak than ever. But how likely is an outright ban or divestiture from TikTok’s Beijing-based parent company ByteDance? Would these measures truly solve the national security risks? And what are the political and legal implications? Evan is joined by FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr to discuss.

References:

• House Energy and Commerce hearing
• Twitter thread by Carr responding to Chew’s written testimony
• Press conference with Rep. Jamaal Bowman and TikTok creators
• Variety report with analyst predictions on likelihood and timeline of a ban or divestiture
• Vice report on TikTok pushing suicide videos to teenagers
• The Hill report on DoJ investigating TikTok over surveillance of journalists
• Clip of MSNBC analyst advocating a broader approach to Chinese apps