Publications: Daniel Castro

The Grok bikini controversy highlights real harms from AI misuse, but it also shows that the right response is enforcing existing laws, holding bad actors accountable, and pursuing tech-neutral, proportionate policies—rather than rushing into broad, AI-specific regulation that risks undermining free expression and innovation.

If the year ahead in technology and innovation policy lives up to its potential, it could be a consequential one because there is a long list of important issues on the table. Herein, we offer 10 that are on top of our minds.

The Internet may be forever, but regulatory frameworks should not be. Decisions made today about web crawling will help determine where the next generation of AI leadership emerges—whether in Europe, the United States, or elsewhere.

U.S. semiconductor export controls swing unpredictably between administrations, undermining innovation and security. The solution is a clear, bipartisan strategy that narrowly restricts the most sensitive technologies while allowing U.S. chipmakers to compete globally.

The Trump administration’s decision to allow H200 chip sales to China is strategically sound because it keeps Chinese firms reliant on U.S. technology, supports American chipmakers’ R&D, and preserves U.S. competitive advantage, though imposing a 25 percent fee undermines these benefits.

iRobot’s collapse and sale to a Chinese firm illustrate how blocking domestic consolidation in the name of antitrust can weaken U.S. technology leadership and ultimately undermine national competitiveness.

The European Commission’s proposed tweaks to the ePrivacy Directive offer only minor relief from intrusive cookie prompts, but to truly support innovation, free digital services, and Europe’s competitiveness, policymakers must fundamentally overhaul the outdated consent model.

The European Commission’s €120 million DSA fine against X is arbitrary and overreaching. The U.S. government should continue pushing back against foreign regulations that harm American platforms and citizens.

In an op-ed for The Dispatch, Daniel Castro argues that banning superintelligent AI is misguided because it’s based on speculation, would undermine U.S. innovation and security, and should be replaced with strong oversight—not restrictions on advancing knowledge.

In China Daily, Daniel Castro argues that the U.S. and China face AI risks—like models enabling biological threats or cyberattacks—that are too great for either to manage alone, and can be mitigated through coordinated safety measures such as joint research, incident reporting, and red-team testing.