Tech Policy Grind

How do we protect young people online without sacrificing privacy and autonomy? In our latest episode of the Tech Policy Grind, Justice Shannon sits down with Dr. Jennifer King, Privacy and Data Policy Fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, for a nuanced conversation about age assurance, the current practices, and the emerging practices used to verify user age in online and offline spaces. Whether you’re a policymaker, technologist, or just curious about the future of privacy online, this episode is not to be missed.

What do First Amendment rights have in common with Calvin and Hobbes? In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the First Amendment is on trial, and according to Prof. Eric Goldman, it looks like the referees are playing Calvinball. On the latest episode of Tech Policy Grind, hosted by Justice Shannon, Prof. Goldman, a leading First Amendment scholar and law professor, breaks down the Supreme Court’s fractured logic in this pivotal case. His take? Justice Thomas didn’t follow precedent, he put it in a blender, cherry-picking fragments of past rulings to justify a result that was already decided. It’s a bold critique of how the Court handles First Amendment rights in the digital age and a warning for the future of content regulation, free speech, and tech policy.

In this episode of Tech Policy Grind, the conversation delves into the significant antitrust case against Google led by the US Department of Justice. The discussion covers the historical context of antitrust actions, the proposed remedies aimed at breaking Google’s monopoly, and the implications for competition in the tech industry. Joe Jerome from DuckDuckGo provides insights into the complexities of the case, the importance of technical expertise in enforcement, and the potential impact on consumers and the future of AI development. The episode concludes with reflections on the global regulatory landscape and the ongoing nature of the legal proceedings. This episode was recorded on November 22, 2024 and is being published ahead of Google’s response, which comes out on December 20, 2024. 

Today on the Tech Policy Grind: Our editor, Evan, bids the show farewell for his new role in corporate privacy compliance. He chats with Pedro Pavon, a privacy attorney at Meta, about what it means to be an advocate on the corporate side, how birding can help us maintain a beginners mindset, and how Pedro launched the Data Protection Breakfast Club. Pedro is a lawyer and policy advocate focused on digital privacy, data strategy, and algorithmic fairness. He hosts the Data Protection Breakfast Club podcast and teaches privacy law at Georgia State University College of Law.

This week, we’re sharing two conversations from State of the Net that discuss the importance of responsible product design and ethical red teaming for AI. First, we chatted with Aishwarya Vardhana. As a full stack product designer, she designs innovative interfaces and experiences with safety, privacy, and other human rights considerations baked into the product. At State of the Net, when this conversation was recorded, she shared how she thinks about building ethical, inclusive and responsible technology, and how she prioritizes user needs to help keep people safe online. Then, we sat down with Harley Geiger, Counsel on Cybersecurity Services at Venable, about ethical AI redteaming. What is ethical AI redteaming? And how are redteamers protected under the law when they test out vulnerabilities of AI models? We get into that and much more the conversation with Harley, Foundry fellow Sasa Jovanovic and me during State of the Net. DISCLAIMER: Daniela, Evan, Sasa, Harley and Aishwarya engaged with this episode by the Internet Law & Policy Foundry voluntarily and in their personal capacity. The views and opinions expressed on this show do not reflect the organizations and institutions they are affiliated with.