Explain to Shane

As more states adopt online age verification laws, how can policymakers protect minors without compromising privacy and free expression? What cybersecurity risks arise when third-party services collect sensitive personal information? And could mobile driver's licenses offer a more secure and privacy-preserving approach to age verification?
To explore these questions, Shane recently moderated a panel with Scott Vien, Harry Oppenheimer, and Paul Lekas. Vien is the program manager for the Digital Trust Service at the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), where he oversees digital trust initiatives involving mobile driver's licenses and identification. Oppenheimer is an assistant professor at Georgia Tech's Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy and co-director of the Center for Digital Human Security, where he studies digital globalization and the politics of cybersecurity. Lekas is the executive vice president for Global Public Policy and Government Affairs at the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA), where he leads policy efforts on cybersecurity, data protection, privacy, and internet regulation. In this recording of their panel conversation, they discuss the technical limitations of age verification, the privacy and security risks associated with third-party services, and how data minimization and trusted credentials could help address these challenges.

Cable companies are now offering mobile service, wireless carriers are competing for home broadband customers, and satellite providers are even expanding their offerings. As these historically distinct markets converge, policymakers face new questions about competition and connectivity. What regulatory reforms would help bring broadband to unserved communities while keeping service affordable? Why does access to unlicensed spectrum matter for the future of Wi-Fi? And how could China’s efforts to shape global spectrum policy affect American technology companies?
To discuss this, Shane is joined by Sam Love, chief policy and strategy officer at NCTA—The Internet & Television Association. Previously, he co-chaired Invariant’s technology and competition government relations practice and served as a senior policy advisor to then-Senator Cory Gardner, managing the senator’s work on the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee.

“American Dynamism” is the idea that by retooling workers, rebuilding our country’s industrial backbone can take a decade rather than generations. In this episode, we explore what the practical requirements of this work would be. How can commercialized nuclear energy help meet rising energy demand across critical industries? What’s the most pressing issue in the American regulatory environment? And if American Dynamism works, what will America look like in 2035?
To discuss this, Shane is joined by David Ulevitch, general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, where he leads the firm’s American Dynamism team. Previously, he founded OpenDNS, which he sold to Cisco, and has since backed companies like Anduril, Flock Safety, and Radiant. His technical and policy background makes for an engaging episode.

On a global scale, we have seen a rise in the development and enactment of legislation that bans minors from using social media to keep them safe. But what does early evidence of these bills tell us about whether they are working as intended? What's the case for age-appropriate spaces and content instead? And should chatbots be regulated similarly?
To discuss this, Shane is joined by Josh Tabish, senior director for Canada at the Chamber of Progress. Previously, he served as the director of policy and advocacy at the Canadian Internet Registration Authority as well as a Ford Foundation / Media Democracy Fund Technology Exchange Fellow for Fight for the Future. His extensive portfolio covers domestic and international technology policy issues.

Artificial intelligence is transforming the legal and tax sectors of business. However, neither the legal nor the tax establishments may be ready for what’s coming. There's a real tension here. On one side, lawyers are using AI to draft filings and manage their work, and some firms are building their own AI systems. On the other hand, the legal world remains slow to adopt this new tool. What does that look like in practice? Would more consistent, data-driven outcomes make justice fairer, or merely more uniform? And when an AI system contributes to a legal decision, who is accountable if it gets something wrong?
To discuss this and more, Benjamin Alarie joins Shane. Benjamin is a leading voice in this debate and the coauthor, with Samuel Becher, of a new book, Superjustice: Law in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. He originated the concept of the “legal singularity,” the idea that advances in artificial intelligence could eventually make the outcomes of legal disputes almost perfectly predictable and perhaps even automate much of the practice of law. Ben is also the cofounder and CEO of Blue J, which uses the latest large language models and a vast database of authoritative tax content to deliver high-quality, source-driven answers to challenging tax questions.