Artificial Intelligence

AI isn’t destroying jobs; it’s creating them. At least in 2024, the surge in AI activity and data center construction generated more jobs than AI displaced.

Detractors of capitalism argue that it took over fifty years for the British Industrial Revolution’s benefits to reach average workers. That narrative is at best contested and, at worst, wrong.

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% fee undermines these benefits.

If we’re lucky, AI will restore the productivity growth that has eluded us for 15 years—not through dystopian transformation, but through steady, incremental improvements across the economy.

The Center for Data Innovation recommends that the establishment and implementation of the American AI Exports Program maximizes the expansion of U.S. AI technology and reinforces American leadership globally.

The DMA’s forced interoperability undermines platform differentiation, weakens security and reliability, and ultimately leaves European consumers with degraded versions of global technologies.

The in-person panel held on Capitol Hill explored the unique use cases enabled by open models, how open-source AI increases competition across the AI stack, and how it enables a wide range of firms, researchers, and public institutions to build and deploy AI. It also explored what steps policymakers can take to support a secure and thriving open AI ecosystem.

Some Korean commentary misreads AGI as a threat to labor and a rationale for public compute. In reality, AGI is better understood as a productivity shock that expands economic output. Resetting the narrative is essential for Korea to pursue policies that strengthen private-sector capacity, support AI diffusion, and enhance innovation.

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.