Advertise on podcast: Explain to Shane

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.

Employees at several leading AI companies are asking the US government and international bodies to slow the development of frontier models. Doing so would put governments in the position of deciding when new models are safe enough to release. Yet policymakers also warn that the United States must move faster than China and that prerelease reviews could stifle innovation. Are these two goals in tension with one another? Can existing laws and liability rules address AI harms without giving governments control over which models reach the market? And can any international institution realistically govern a technology spread across the entire digital economy? To discuss this, Shane is joined by Milton Mueller and Adam Thierer. Milton is a professor and director of the master of science in cybersecurity program at Georgia Tech University’s Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy. He is also the cofounder and director of the Internet Governance Project at Georgia Tech. Adam is a resident senior fellow with the technology and innovation team at the R Street Institute and a visiting senior fellow at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

Until recently, concerns about AI agents conducting autonomous cyber operations were largely theoretical. The OpenAI–Hugging Face incident in July changed that, while Anthropic’s Mythos exposed software vulnerabilities buried for decades. Together, these incidents have forced policymakers to reconsider how governments and companies prepare for AI-enabled cyber threats. Can the federal government and private sector keep pace with increasingly capable models? Will open-source AI strengthen cyber defenses or make dangerous capabilities harder to contain? And can policymakers encourage companies to share threat information while holding them accountable for insecure systems? Shane joins Evan Swarztrauber in a crossover episode with The Center Edge. Evan is the founder of CorePoint Strategies and a senior fellow at the Digital Progress Institute. He previously served at the Federal Communications Commission as a policy adviser to then-Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Brendan Carr.

Americans rely on wireless connections for nearly every part of modern life, and demand for the airwaves that make those connections possible is only growing. But much of the nation’s spectrum remains accessible by federal agencies under a system approaching its 100th anniversary. How can the United States free up more spectrum for commercial use? Can the military rely more heavily on commercial networks without compromising national security? And could market-based incentives help federal agencies use this valuable resource more efficiently? To discuss this, Shane is joined by Roslyn Layton, executive vice president at Strand Consult. She is also a digital policy fellow at Michigan State University’s Quello Center and a senior fellow at the National Security Institute at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School. She previously served as a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and on the president-elect’s transition team for the Federal Communications Commission.

New frontier AI models are changing the cybersecurity landscape. As advanced systems become more capable of finding and exploiting software vulnerabilities, the federal government is trying to determine how to protect critical infrastructure and maintain national security. The administration’s June executive order on AI and cybersecurity offers one answer, but it also raises several harder questions. Can the government keep up with rapidly developing models? If officials want to review every model before release, is that process really voluntary? And how can policymakers keep American networks safe without sacrificing innovation? To unpack what comes next, Shane is joined by Kevin Frazier in a crossover episode with Scaling Laws. Kevin is the director of the AI Innovation and Law Program at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law and a senior fellow at the Abundance Institute. He has testified before Congress on artificial intelligence and emerging technology issues and is a regular contributor to Lawfare.

Artificial intelligence is being integrated into nearly every industry, but how is Congress using AI? As policymakers and their staff work to serve their constituents, can AI be used as a tool to modernize legislative operations, better equip staff, and strengthen our democratic processes? Congress has a unique opportunity to embrace this emerging technology, and failing to do so may leave it behind. To discuss this, Shane is joined by Aubrey Wilson, managing director of POPVOX Foundation. She has extensive experience on Capitol Hill as a former House legislative assistant, legislative correspondent, and deputy staff director for the Committee on House Administration in the 118th Congress. She was also a member of the R Street Institute’s governance policy and federal affairs team. Her work on the Hill and in academia provides a creative foundation for discussing how Congress is using AI.

There is an invisible resource that powers our smartphones and connects our devices: spectrum airwaves. But regulations governing these airwaves were set decades ago, long before the age of smartphones and autonomous vehicles. With technology changing at a rapid pace, are these regulations for this finite resource outdated? What is the growing importance of airwave spectrum in an economy that is increasingly wireless? And what does a property-rights regime for spectrum look like in practice? Shane is joined by Professor Thomas Hazlett, author of the best-selling book The Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technology, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone (2017) and a leading voice in telecommunications, media, and the internet. He is currently the H. H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics and director of the Information Economy Project at Clemson University. He previously served as chief economist at the Federal Communications Commission. His extensive knowledge makes for an excellent conversation.

Information technology and digital services are a rapidly changing sector operating in an increasingly complex regulatory environment. International bodies have struggled to fast-track standards for the digital services industry, and major companies have adopted their own. These trends risk creating a more fragmented world in which digital trust and safety suffer. To protect universal human rights, companies and governments need to speak the same language to identify industry best practices. The question remains: Which international bodies and frameworks are best equipped to address these challenges? Joining Shane are two experts working on the Digital Trust and Safety Partnership, David Sullivan and Farzaneh Badiei. The Digital Trust and Safety Partnership is an industry consortium focused on delivering best practices for protecting human rights in digital services. David Sullivan is the executive director of the partnership and previously served as the co-chair of the Digital Safety Risk Assessment Framework at the World Economic Forum’s Global Coalition for Digital Safety. Farzaneh Badiei is head of outreach and engagement at the partnership and is the founder of Digital Medusa, an organization that promotes sound digital governance.

As the digitization of the economy accelerates, the friction points facing the adoption of cryptocurrency are becoming more evident. The benefits of on-ramping to stablecoin are obvious: faster and more efficient money exchanges and improved cross-border transfers. Complicating adoption, however, are the challenges regulators face in assessing the risks associated with blockchain and defining the technology. Add to that the weight of an antiquated banking system and earning the public’s trust regarding their financial security. Ultimately, how do we best position ourselves to harness the benefits of crypto? And how do we make stablecoin accessible to everyone, not just tech-forward corporations? For this episode, Shane is joined by Polygon Labs CEO Marc Boiron. At Polygon, Boiron works with all aspects of the organization to scale out the company’s Open Money Stack and integrated services. Boiron is uniquely suited to answer these questions, having previously served as Polygon’s chief legal officer and understanding what policies it takes to move the economy on-chain. His background in both law and business positions him well to tackle the world of blockchain. Also joining the conversation is Nicoletta Kolpakov. She is the director of the Cirrus Institute, where she leads research and policy analysis in blockchain, digital finance, and AI.

National security is becoming inextricably linked with cloud computing and AI—and this year’s Munich Security Conference solidified that fact. International statesmen met with technology leaders to discuss cloud infrastructure resilience, AI and automated defense systems, and the evolving dynamic between digital sovereignty and interoperability. But how will defense institutions balance the pressure to automate quickly without outrunning the workforce’s ability to trust the systems they depend on? And what developments in AI aren’t getting nearly enough attention from defense and policy leaders? Shane interviews Michael Greenwald, Director of Global Executive Relations at Amazon Web Services. Michael Greenwald joins us to discuss Munich, global defense alliances, and how AWS’s unique sovereign-by-design architecture powers innovation is secure, scalable AI and Cloud infrastructure. His previous experience as the US Treasury Department’s financial attaché to Qatar and Kuwait, paired with his deep understanding of technology systems, makes him an ideal guest to discuss the future of national security and automation.

As artificial intelligence becomes a key part of national infrastructure, developers across the United States are rushing to build large data centers in many regions. Many of these areas haven’t seen this level of industrial growth in decades, and these projects appear to bring the promise of jobs and economic growth to communities that need it. Despite the potential for renewed prosperity, local residents are opposing data centers. Most cite environmental impacts and increasing energy costs as major concerns. Are these worries based in reality? If not, where are they originating from, and how can we address these narratives? To discuss this, I am joined by Lynne Kiesling and Steve DelBianco. Lynne is a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where she leads the Electricity Technology, Regulation, and Market Design Working Group. She also directs the Institute for Regulatory Law and Economics at the Northwestern University Center on Law, Business, and Economics, and is a member of the US Department of Energy’s Electricity Advisory Committee. Steve is the president and CEO of NetChoice, where he collaborates with its members to protect online free enterprise and free expression. He is a seasoned expert on internet governance.

The GPS is essential to modern navigation, communication, and critical infrastructure. However, the United States faces serious threats to GPS technology, many of which are rarely discussed publicly. In addition to the looming threat from Russian and Chinese weaponry, increasing orbital debris and severe space weather have the potential to damage or destroy American satellites, causing a complete collapse of our navigational systems. A sustained disruption could significantly impair navigation, timing, and communications systems nationwide. America has more satellites than any other country, and our economy depends heavily on space-based positioning, navigation, and timing services. Former members of the National Security Council and outside advisers have called GPS “a single point of failure for America.” To discuss this matter, Shane is joined by two experts in GPS policy. Dana A. Goward is president of the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation and a former member of the National Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Advisory Board, which advises the government on GPS policy. He took this role after retiring from service in the Coast Guard and as the United States maritime navigation authority. Also joining Shane is Coast Guard Rear Admiral Jeff Hathaway (ret.), a longtime navigator and board member of the foundation.