The Dynamist

As the saying goes, “if the service is free, you are the product.” In the social media age, many companies don't compete for our money, but for our time. While many traditional entertainment companies increasingly rely on monthly subscription fees, social media products like TikTok and Instagram are “free,” powered by consumer data used to sell advertising. What platforms compete with each other for our attention? Does watching TV make you less likely to use social media? Or are you just scrolling the small screen while watching the big screen? As policymakers consider the nature of competition and issues involving “Big Tech,” such as data privacy, how should they factor in how much attention consumers pay to different platforms? Joining us to discuss all of this is Scott Wallsten, President of the Technology Policy Institute and a PhD economist with broad expertise. His prior roles include stints at the FCC and White House Council of Economic Advisers. Read TPI’s paper on the attention economy here. 

What if your rabbi used ChatGPT to write a sermon? What if you asked a faith-based chat bot to help you with bible study? The proliferation of AI tech is changing every sector, including religion and theology. The mechanized sanctum is no longer theoretical, as the rise of AI in religious spaces poses both unprecedented opportunities and serious ethical challenges. It poses questions around the nature of sentience, personhood, and what constitutes a creator. Can a super-intelligent AI have a soul? And there are also more immediate questions: will certain faiths use AI more effectively to spread their gospel and grow their ranks? Does AI have a religious bent? Should there even be a place for this tech in religious practice at all?Evan is joined by friend of the podcast Nathan Leamer, CEO of Fixed Gear Strategies, a boutique tech policy consulting firm, and former policy advisor to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai.

Google is facing legal challenges that could strike at the heart of the company’s advertising business, which accounts for 80 percent of its global sales. The U.S. Department of Justice sued Google for allegedly monopolizing digital advertising technology (ad tech). Across the pond, the European Commission told the Big Tech giant recently its preliminary view that the company distorted competition in ad tech—favoring its own services to the detriment of competitors. The outcomes of these cases could force Google to divest significant portions of its business and potentially transform the tech industry.Is Google really guilty of the agencies’ claims? And how could proposed legislation in Congress impact the company going forward? Joining Evan is Mark Meador, partner at Kressin Meador, a boutique antitrust law firm. He was formerly Deputy Chief Counsel for Antitrust and Competition Policy for Senator Mike Lee. Prior to that, he was an attorney at both the DoJ and the FTC.

Will artificial intelligence spell the end of humanity? The concept has been implanted in American culture through dystopian phenomena like Terminator and The Matrix, but how real is this possibility? Since the public release of Open AI’s ChatGPT in late 2022, AI doomerism has played a key role in shaping the discourse around this rapidly advancing technology. “Artificial intelligence could lead to extinction,” blares the BBC. “The race to win the AI competition could doom us all,” warns The Japan Times. Some commentators have even said that we may need to bomb data centers to stop or slow AI development.Is so-called AI “doomerism” simply an outgrowth of AI-related science fiction? Or is there a concerted PR effort to frame the conversation? How does doomerism impact the debate over how/whether to regulate AI, and what positive applications of AI aren’t receiving enough attention?  Evan is joined by Perry Metzger, CEO of a stealth AI startup and founder of Alliance for the Future. You can read his work on his Substack, Diminished Capacity. Evan is also joined by Jon Askonas, a professor of politics at Catholic University and Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation. He has written broadly on tech and culture for outlets like Foreign Policy and American Affairs, and his work has been discussed at length in the New York Times. 

Can tech companies send data about European Union citizens across the Atlantic? According to a new framework, the answer is yes. Recently, the EU formally adopted a new agreement with the U.S. on data privacy that gives companies the green light to send data back and forth. For years, EU privacy advocates have raised alarms that U.S. intel agencies like the NSA are spying on EU citizens, particularly by tapping the data droves of Big Tech companies like Google and Meta. This framework is the third attempt at a data-sharing framework after past attempts were struck down by a European court after the Edward Snowden revelations revealed U.S. spying practices. Will the third time be the charm?Evan is joined by Caitlin Fennessy, Vice President and Chief Knowledge Officer at the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Prior to joining the IAPP, Caitlin was the Privacy Shield Director at the U.S. International Trade Administration, where she spent ten years working on international privacy and cross-border data flow policy issues. You can read her work on these issues here.

How much does U.S. regulation really cost Americans and the economy? A new report from FAI found that, in 2022 alone, agencies issued more than more than 3,000 rules, including 265 “significant” ones with an estimated cost of over $117 billion. Some estimates say the totality of federal regulations costs the economy nearly $2 trillion. These rules span everything from healthcare to the environment, but what is the actual effect on our daily lives? Some critics of the ever growing bureaucracy (or “Deep State” as President Trump calls it) say Congress has let federal agencies run amok—writing unclear laws that then have to be interpreted and implemented by unelected bureaucrats. Has Congress given too much power to the Executive Branch? Is there a way that Congress can flex its muscles over federal agencies?Evan is joined by Satya Thallam, Senior Fellow at FAI and former White House and Senate policy advisor, and Dan Lips, Head of Policy at FAI and former national security policy advisor in Congress. Read Satya's recent report on reining in the administrative state. 

The feds, via the SEC, are cracking down on Binance, the largest cryptocurrency exchange in the world, essentially calling it an illegal operation. Prior to his appointment as Biden’s SEC chair, Gary Gensler taught a class on Bitcoin at MIT, which made some crypto enthusiasts think he might be friendly to the industry. But he’s been anything but a friend to crypto. His proponents say he’s taking long overdue action to rein in an industry rife with fraud, scams, and get-rich-quick schemes. Critics worry the SEC’s increasingly aggressive approach will send crypto and blockchain-based innovations overseas, and see the U.S. cede leadership to other nations. As the debate rages over how to regulate various crypto coins (are they commodities or securities?), is there a way for the SEC to go after back actors without casting too wide a net? Evan and Luke are joined by Dr. Thomas L. Hogan, a former Chief Economist for the US Senate Banking Committee and now a specialist in crypto and monetary policy with the American Institute for Economic Research. You can check out his work here.

The question has become cliche: Why doesn’t Europe have “Big Tech” companies? Critics of the European Union’s approach to tech regulation say it’s just that—they’ve regulated too much. But proponents of a stronger hand say America’s relative “light-touch” has left consumers unprotected from abuse of their personal and sensitive data. As the EU continues to lead the democratic world in regulating tech, will their standards become the global standard, or will tech firms start splintering their products and user experiences for different markets? Is the impact of European regulation overplayed? Can differences in the continent’s tech sector be better explained by a more conservative investment culture than the risk-taking of Silicon Valley? Evan discusses all that and more with Yael Ossowski, deputy director of Consumer Choice Center, a global consumer advocacy group. Check out his radio show & podcast Consumer Choice Radio here.

With the 2024 election shaping up to be a digital bloodbath, social media platforms like Facebook will continue to be an electoral lightning rod in the United States around the world. Social media executives are under intense scrutiny as disagreements flare over misinformation, foreign interference, bias, free speech, and voter targeting. Now, AI-generated ads are already making their way to voters’ screens at a time when the rules are still being defined. With artificial intelligence poised to play a major role in the U.S. presidential election, how will governments and companies respond?  Joining Evan to discuss is Katie Harbath, founder and CEO of Anchor Change where she advises clients on tech policy issues. Previously she worked at Facebook where she built and led teams responsible for managing elections and working with governments and elected officials to use Facebook and Instagram to connect and engage with constituents. You can subscribe to Katie’s newsletter here and read her work for Bipartisan Policy Center here.

In April, an anonymous TikToker released a song, “Heart on my Sleeve,” that was listened to by millions of people before being taken down by various streaming platforms. The problem? The song wasn’t by the famous artists Drake and The Weeknd. It was generated by artificial intelligence that mimicked their voices. This song and other examples of AI-generated media have sparked a debate among artists, lawmakers, and others about whether and how generative AI should be allowed to learn from copyrighted works. As the U.S. Copyright Office, courts, and Congress look to tackle the issue, is there a way to balance the interests of human creators, AI developers, and consumers? Evan is joined by Daniel Takash, regulatory policy fellow at Niskanen Center, a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington, DC. You can read his work on copyright and other topics here.