The Chinese Communist Party has blocked Western internet companies from accessing their domestic market for years.
Now, others are following in their footsteps.
Nigeria banned Twitter for deleting a tweet from the president.
India raided Twitter's office in New Delhi.
We can't return to the libertarian days of the early internet (nor would we want to).
But leaders need to defend and promote the values of the free and open internet, while taking targeted measures to address privacy concerns, hate speech, and foreign interference in elections.
If liberal democracies don't coordinate on regulation, then we will get one of two very bad outcomes:
1) The Chinese model will win out & we'll get a true splinternet
2) Liberal democracies just default to the most restrictive set of regulations (the "Brussels effect")
We need to act fast because the playbook of "shut down the internet during a crisis" is picking up steam.
And through the Belt and Road Initiative, China has been willing to invest in developing countries to a degree the West hasn't.
Why is there no US/UK competitor to Huawei?
Here's a few places to start:
1. Invest $450 billion in closing the digital divide.
Prioritize investments in satellite broadband (Starlink, OneWeb, Viasat, and SES).
These are quasi-censorship resistant and easier to roll out globally than physical infrastructure.
2. Incentivize investment in servers and core infrastructure, including building out content delivery networks (CDNs) to increase internet consumption.
3. Make public investments in artificial intelligence R&D that shapes the competitive terrain to be compatible with liberal values.
For example, machine learning techniques like simulation learning and one-shot learning require less real world data — and fewer privacy concerns.
4. Double down on the Internet Society and create a more ambitious vision for the future of internet protocols.
The “litigation doom loop” is a huge problem for clean energy deployment.
Solar projects that receive the strictest level of NEPA environmental review have the highest litigation rate:
64%
By contrast, fossil fuel projects only have a 32% litigation rate.
.@ArnabDatta321 and @EnergyLawProf have an important piece in @mattyglesias’s Slow Boring today looking at how clean energy projects can get stuck in an indefinite cycle of environmental review, judicial injunction, and then remand for more review.
@ArnabDatta321 @EnergyLawProf @mattyglesias It's so perverse that the strictest level of environmental review disproportionately slows down clean energy projects.
From 2012-2018:
60% of all environmental impact statements for energy projects were for transmission/solar/wind/hydro/etc