big day for #artificalintelligence policy w Senate Judiciary hearing at 10EST on regulating #AI, possibly even with a new licensing regime for #artificalintelligence.

Here's link to livestream​: judiciary.senate.gov/committee-acti… [plus there's another AI hearing today] at the AI hearing, I expect the usual amount of heated, panicky rhetoric plus suggestions for being more like Europe w something along the lines of an 'FDA for Artificial intelligence,' licensing for AI providers or NEPA for algorithms.
On that idea... medium.com/@AdamThierer/n…

"Bureaucratic rigidity has supplanted human responsibility. This is a foundational flaw in the operating system of modern democracy. The hierarchy of democratic authority... exists only on paper."
- from an important new essay by @PhilipKHoward: riponsociety.org/article/democr… 2/ Howard recommends many smart reforms of laws & bureaucracies, including the creation of "spring cleaning" commissions that help craft "simpler codes that leave room for officials and citizens to use their common sense in most situations." 👍

1/ It’s very clear now that for a great many conservatives, when it comes to modern media policy, the ends justify the means. Social media & digital tech platforms are simply part of a broader cultural & political war. And so they say sweeping regulatory controls are justified. 2/ some of you will laugh and say: Well that's always been true! No, it actually hasn't. There was genuine movement in the Reagan-era conservative movement away from treating media as a means to an end or a plaything of whichever party was in power at the time.

Conservative responses to the Facebook oversight board decision are now trending even harder in favor of extreme regulatory solutions: breakups, common carriage mandates, or a revived Fairness Doctrine. According, here are several things I've written addressing these proposals... 2/ "When It Comes to Fighting Social Media Bias, More Regulation Is Not the Answer" (via @discourse) discoursemagazine.com/ideas/2021/04/…

excellent new law rev article by @GaryMarchant1 on "Governance of Emerging Technologies as a Wicked Problem." A great framework for understanding tech governance challenges & options. vanderbiltlawreview.org/lawreview/2020… Gary identifies 4 reasons why emerging technologies present major challenges for traditional regulation:
(1) the "pacing problem;"
(2) many lie outside scope of existing jurisdictions;
(3) breadth of application / span many fields;
(4) unprecedented uncertainty about them.

1/ @micsolana’s powerfully worded “Extract or Die” essay notes the growing importance of innovation arbitrage as a modern tech policy issue. He notes how CA's “techxodus” -- the migration of the tech industry out of the state -- is accelerating. solana.substack.com/p/extract-or-d… 2/ I’ve written @ innovation arbitrage in essays & my latest book where I defined it as, “The movement of ideas, innovations, or operations to those jurisdictions that provide a legal and regulatory environment more hospitable to entrepreneurial activity.” medium.com/tech-liberatio…

1/ Remember when critics were panicking about AT&T's acquisition of DirecTV 5 years ago? Well, now T is already looking to sell at considerable loss. wsj.com/articles/at-t-…

It's another powerful example of technological change decimating market power. But the weird thing is.. 2/ history repeated here & neither business exes or regulators learned any lessons. This exact same thing happened to Rupert Murdoch 15 years ago when he & News Corp took a considerable loss on DirecTV, calling it a "turd bird" while spinning it off. dslreports.com/shownews/Murdo…

* Does technology constrain or expand state power?
* Does tech undermine legitimacy of nation-states?
* Can innovation serve as “checks & balances”?

These questions are discussed in Ch. 5 of my new book, "Evasive Entrepreneurs & the Future of Governance" amazon.com/Evasive-Entrep… 2/ Experts featured in this chapter include: @taylor_owen, @tylercowen, @paulmromer, @elidourado, @deboraspar, @cshirky, @benjaminwittes, @mgurri, @anjiecast, @hamandcheese, @JasonKuznicki, @CristieFord_Law, Albert Hirschman, Stephen J. Kobrin, J.P. Barlow & many others.

the current debate over #Section230 and online content moderation has been dominated by misinformation, bad reporting, and outright lies. Let’s set the record straight with 10 or so must-reads on the topic … #1: get yourself a copy of @jkosseff’s “26 Words That Created the Internet,” the definitive early history of #Section230: amazon.com/Twenty-Six-Wor… & @ericgoldman’s “Overview of Sec 230 Immunity” papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf… [Also see their archive of 230 cases: jeffkosseff.com/resources]

um, no. This revisionist history of the "golden age" of broadcast regulation & the Fairness Doctrine ignores the troubling history of FCC speech controls & unintended consequences of regulation. That regime gave us limited, bland choices. We got away from that model for a reason.

https://twitter.com/Slate/status/1136952582646185984

for those glorifying the Fairness Doctrine, I encourage them to read the great Nat Hentoff's essay, "The History & Possible Revival of the Fairness Doctrine," about real-world experience of life under the FCC's threatening eye. Read passage below... imprimis.hillsdale.edu/the-history-an…