John has it exactly right. Selling out digital liberty and free speech in exchange for a few crumbs of limited state AI preemption is not a good deal. Wrote about that yesterday with @JGWithrow: rstreet.org/commentary/ai-pr…

The bill quite literally sets different rules for certain companies based purely on them being more successful. In no way does it make companies “play by the same rules.” A company below the thresholds set in this legislation can do everything it bans.

This bill (AICOA) really gets me fired up b/c it’s basically a bill of attainder targeting a couple of firms for being way too good at doing things lots of other companies do but don’t do as well. It’s the break Tom Brady and Michael Jordan’s legs of competition policy. 👎

As I covered in April, while age verification laws are often well intentioned, they have broad unintended consequences. In the UK, for example, OSA’s stringent requirements have left companies opting to overcensor due to lawsuit worries. Similar legislation in the US would have similar consequences x.com/edtarnowski/status/204…

Empower parents, not government. Stop this nonsense highlighted by @TheFIREorg 🔥🔥🔥

RT @TaylorLorenz: Rep. Auchincloss admits on the record that the mass surveillance and censorship laws he and his ilk are seeking to pass a…

Parents have control now. You don’t need a law for that.

New at @TOTMblog : “Artificial Intelligence, Natural Ignorance” A Hayekian perspective on AI regulation, the knowledge problem, and why policymakers should be cautious about trying to direct technological change. @andashleysays @Jeffrey_Depp truthonthemarket.com/2026/06…

Children should not navigate the digital world alone, which is why parents should be empowered, not government! The ASAAct is big-government policy for politicians and regulators to take the place of parents because some people don’t trust parents. Better path for government is educating parents and kids about online activity rather than pushing bad policy. Empower parents, not government!

It’s baaaa-aaaack

Two things can simultaneously be true about this new AI security executive order: 1) This represents a reasonable governance arrangement for frontier model security and its oversight, at least when compared with the far more intrusive ideas floated earlier, like the pre-vetting of models via a formal government licensing regime (aka, “FDA for AI”). 2) This represent as significant win for the military-industrial complex and the continuing fiction of “voluntarism” surrounding its inner workings. Thanks to open-ended EOs like this, the new growing AI-industrial complex will further concentrate power around AI – in both government and industry – and lead to more avenues for public officials to exert control over not just model security, but potentially many other aspects of algorithmic development and use, including content-related matters. After all, “security” is in the eye of the beholder (and future administrations and officials).

🚨🚨 North Carolina Age Verification Bill Hearing Tomorrow AM! 🚨🚨 This bill is unconstitutional and would negatively impact NC consumers' online experience. A quick🧵:

more equity stakes insanity on the way. Crony computational capitalism via "equity stakes" isn't real capitalism at all. It is just a softer version of Chinese-style central planning. It's fundamentally anti-free market and un-American. This is also how big government gets its hooks into the AI economy in an even bigger way and comes to influence information systems at a deep level, and along multiple dimensions. The power of the purse is a formidable regulatory tool, especially once Uncle Sam is a formal co-owner of your business. I especially can't wait to see how Gavin Newsom or the next Dem president uses these equity stakes to impose a mass DEI agenda on every company who cut these deals with Trump Admin. Hope you like a slice of social justice pie with your your equity steak, er.. stake. Oh, the irony of it all!

On behalf of @ITIFdc, @JosephVConiglio warns the @EU_Commission that its draft measures specifying Android's interoperability requirements under the DMA would threaten user privacy and discourage Google from continuing to invest and innovate in the Android ecosystem. itif.org/publications/2026/0…

It is unconstitutional for the FCC to take regulatory action based on the content of broadcast speech.

The hearing at the Senate Judiciary Committee on "From the Courtroom to Congress: Why Landmark Social Media Verdicts Demand Federal Action to Protect Kids Online" just ended, after 2 hours of mainly propping up two proposals: KOSA and reform/repeal Section 230. 🧵Some thoughts:

The implication here, that European policymakers could end up banning VPNs, is rather chilling. Under the cover of targeting big tech, lots of our digital rights and protections in Europe are being eroded. It's a major problem and more people should be fighting against it.

"...the pattern is familiar from earlier moral panics over comic books, rock music, and video games. Each was sincerely felt. Each rested on weak social science amplified by strong public emotion. Each produced a policy that aged poorly."