Science, Technology, and Public Policy

David Kearn argues that even in the absence of restrictive resource and budgetary constraints, a focus on identifying and achieving concrete objectives that will position the United States and its allies to effectively deter aggression in critical regional flashpoints should be the priority given the stressed nature of the defense industrial base and the nuclear enterprise.

Just three Big Tech firms control two-thirds of the global market for cloud computing resources used to develop AI models. This centralization results in AI systems designed to serve corporate interests. Publicly developed and owned AI models and computing infrastructure could democratize the technology itself, creating an open platform for innovation and offering guarantees about the availability, equitability, and sustainability of AI technology. The U.S. should establish a federal services agency dedicated to AI to democratize the field while prioritizing the impact of AI models on democracy.

Mariana Budjeryn writes: War never stops at the border, especially on a continent like Europe. The European Union absorbed millions of Ukrainian war refugees and poured billions of euros into Ukraine's defenses and economic survival. The war permanently reshaped Europe: its demographics, political economy, and energy architecture are shifting in ways that will have irreversible long-term consequences. All of this is because in a very real sense Ukraine already is inextricably woven into the fabric of Europe: Ukraine’s pain is Europe’s pain and Ukraine’s gain will inevitably be Europe's gain, too.

The modern representative democracy was the best form of government that mid-18th-century technology could conceive of. The 21st century is a different place scientifically, technically and socially. Should we rethink the ways we govern ourselves?

A key constructive-use case for artificial intelligence in democratic processes is to serve as discussion moderator and consensus builder.

A.I. could bolster democracy instead of undermining it - if there were an A.I. system developed by government and available to all citizens, argue Bruce Schneier, Henry Farrell, and Nathan Sanders.

Breaking up Big Tech companies could trigger unintended, and possibly irreparable, collateral damage to America’s quest to remain the world’s leader in new technologies, write Venkatesh Narayanamurti and Steven C. Currall.

Artificial intelligence has the potential to dramatically alter how we gather information, communicate and work. Experts are also raising questions about how it will affect governance and what it will mean for the future of our democracy. Bruce Schneier, a fellow at the Belfer Center, joins PBS' William Brangham to discuss.

What makes the threat of AI-powered lobbyists greater than that of the high-priced lobbying firms on K Street is their potential for acceleration, write Nathan E. Sanders and Bruce Schneier.

In reshaping the National Science Foundation and other institutions to best support innovation, policymakers should apply evidence-based principles drawn from scholarship and previous experience, write Steven Currall and Venkatesh Narayanamurti.