The Dynamist

The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging the tech companies violated the newspaper’s copyrights by training ChatGPT on millions of Times articles. The decision in this case could have enormous implications for journalism and AI tools like large language models, and the lawsuit could go to the Supreme Court. While OpenAI says such training is “fair use,” the Times says the companies “seek to free-ride” on its journalism. How will the case be decided, and how will the outcome affect the next decade-plus of journalism and AI development? Fundamentally, should companies like OpenAI be allowed to train on copyrighted material without compensating creators?Joining us to discuss all of this today are Matthew Sag and Zach Graves. Sag is a Professor of Law in Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Data Science at Emory University Law School. He is an expert in copyright law and intellectual property, and a leading authority on the fair use doctrine in copyright law and its implications for AI. Graves is the Executive Director at the Foundation for American Innovation. He was recently invited to participate in the Senate’s AI Insight Forum. 

In examining international competition between the U.S. and rivals like China, we tend to think of two types of power—military and economic. How large and advanced is our military compared to others? Are we overly reliant on other countries for resources like oil and microchips? But there’s a third, less commonly thought of type of power that is crucial to America’s role in the world order. We might call it our reputation or our cultural dominance. The Chinese government calls it “discourse power.” In China’s view, America has come to dominate the international system in part by controlling the narrative around governance, norms, and values. For China to gain control in the international order, then, it’s not enough for their economy or military to grow to either match or surpass ours. They have to secure discourse power—one that favors Chinese Communist Party values and their approach to security and human rights. In particular, they see the digital realm as an opportunity to tilt the balance in China’s favor. So what does this look like in practice?Evan is joined by Kenton Thibaut, a senior resident China fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, where she leads China-related research and engagements. See her paper on discourse power and her new article in Foreign Affairs on whether China can swing Taiwan’s election.

With the benefit of hindsight, there’s a lot that people wish they could have done differently after a pandemic, wildfire, or other disasters. That’s why governments, militaries, public health entities, and first responders spend significant time and resources “wargaming” potential scenarios and how best to respond. But while technologies like flight simulators have long played a role in disaster preparedness, AI could dramatically change how wargaming is done and help overcome human “failures of imagination.” How does AI threat-casting compare to human creativity? How could AI change the way governments respond to major stress tests? How might the response to COVID-19 have differed if generative AI were more available to policymakers? Joining us to discuss these questions and more is Phil Siegel, founder of the Center for Advanced Preparedness and Threat Response Simulation (CAPTRS), an AI nonprofit utilizing simulation gaming to progress societal disaster preparedness. 

A San Francisco jury recently ruled that Google's Android app store is a monopoly, siding with Epic Games in a lawsuit initiated in 2020. The verdict focuses on Google's practices, such as mandating app customers and developers use its billing system and taking a 30% commission on app subscriptions. Google intends to appeal, citing cybersecurity and other concerns. This ruling raises questions about Apple's App Store, with Epic's similar case against Apple possibly going to the Supreme Court. The outcome could significantly impact antitrust laws and government efforts to regulate Big Tech.Evan is joined by Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of the Chamber of Progress, an American trade group that represents technology companies on issues such as antitrust law and content moderation. He previously helmed government relations for Lime Bike. Prior to that was senior director of U.S. public policy for Google. Follow Adam on X: @adamkovac 

The worlds of tech and policy are increasingly integrated, for good or ill. Tech professionals are recognizing government service as a vital way to contribute to the national interest, at the same time that politicos and policy experts have realized that they need the tech industry’s experience and insight. Ten years after the Foundation for American Innovation was formed to serve as a bridge between Silicon Valley and DC, the fusion of technology and public policy is greater than ever. But can technologists, founders, and investors really accomplish more in a sclerotic political environment than they can in industry? Jennifer Pahlka, founder of Code for America, served as the Deputy Chief Technology Officer of the United States under President Obama, and as a member of the Defense Innovation Board under Presidents Obama and Trump. This year, she published Recoding America: Why Government Is Failing in the Digital Age and How We Can Do Better. Michael Kratsios, former Principal and Chief of Staff at Thiel Capital, served as Chief Technology Officer of the United States and Under Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon during the Trump administration. He is Managing Director at Scale AI, where he leads corporate strategy and helps accelerate AI applications across industries. Media Fellow Marshall Kosloff hosts The Realignment podcast with FAI. This event was hosted at the Internet Archive in San Francisco on December 4, 2023.  We thank Project 47 for their support of From Tech to Government and Back Again. 

A recent New York Times editorial painted a damning portrait of learning loss from COVID-19 school closures, arguing it “may prove to be the most damaging disruption in the history of American education” setting “student progress in math and reading back by two decades.” The Institute for Education Sciences is a federal agency within the Department of Education with a modest budget and a daunting mandate—figure out what works and what doesn’t, including how to reverse and mitigate learning loss. IES Director Mark Schneider has led the agency since 2017. In that time, the agency has funded an array of million-dollar programs and faced the unprecedented disruptions of COVID-19. Evan and Director Schneider discuss the challenges facing students and educators, what we can learn from COVID-19 and the government’s response, and how artificial intelligence could help individualize education.

Over the last few years, a small but influential group of right-of-center Twitter/X users have begun outlining a vision for what they half-jokingly refer to as Bison Nationalism. In a lot of ways, it’s hard to fully understand all of the relevant context unless you spend too much time online. Is the idea of repopulating the American prairie with buffalo just a meme? A longing for tradition? Or is it a real policy goal? Why might certain communities find this issue compelling, and how does this fit into a broader vision of conservative environmentalism? Joining us to discuss this today is Micah Meadowcroft. Research Director at the Center for Renewing America, a policy group based in DC, and former White House liaison for the Environmental Protection Agency.Read his piece on the future of environmental conservatism here, and his writing on Bison Nationalism here.

The human fascination with creating life dates back centuries. From the ancient myth of Pygmalion, who carved the statue that came to life, to the Jewish legend of the golem, and now to our modern-day marvels in AI, humans remain captivated by questions surrounding consciousness, creation, and the Divine. In a prior episode, we discussed AI’s practical impact on the day-to-day practice of religion. Today, we explore AI’s interaction with religion at a more fundamental level. What are the central philosophical, anthropological, and spiritual issues brought about by the AI phenomenon? What does AI reveal about our own human nature? Can it understand or possess spirituality? And how might a religion like Christianity, with its own set of answers to fundamental human questions, contribute to this conversation?Evan is joined by Taylor Barkley, Director of Technology and Innovation at the Center for Growth and Opportunity, where his primary research concerns the intersection of culture, technology, and innovation. He also has a recent op-ed for Fox News entitled, “Christians shouldn’t fear AI, they should partner with it.” 

Marc Andreessen’s Techno-Optimist Manifesto set the tech world ablaze just a few short weeks ago – and now, he responds to his critics. A bold statement of principles arguing for the liberatory potential of technology, his manifesto generated criticism from both the left and right—including FAI’s own Sam Hammond.In this special edition of The Dynamist, FAI Senior Fellow Jon Askonas and Marc Andreessen hash out the foundations of the Techno-Optimist politics of tomorrow. Marc is a cofounder and general partner at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. He has achieved two rare feats in the tech industry: pioneering a software category used by more than a billion people, and establishing multiple billion-dollar companies. You can read the Techno-Optimist Manifesto here, along with responses discussed on the episode from Ezra Klein and TechCrunch.

When it comes to science and math education, America’s report card has been in decline. According to the National Science Foundation, U.S. students have lagged their peers for over ten years, ranking dead last in math among our closest economic competitors. With the U.S. seeking to lead the world in artificial intelligence, how will the country’s math and science literacy impact jobs and economic growth? The federal government has invested billions of dollars in improving STEM education in K-12 schools. What works? What doesn’t? And how can research and development play a role in achieving America’s education goals? Evan is joined by Melissa Moritz, Senior Fellow for the Social Innovation Team at the Federation of American Scientists, and Dan Lips, Head of Policy and Senior Fellow at FAI. You can check out their co-authored paper on this subject here.