AI doesn’t host; it publishes. This view has implications for regulation (and regulatory relief).
‘This changes everything. Last year I suggested we needed a Section 230.ai. I think we got it, an implicit word “human” added, meaning platforms won’t be treated as a publisher of “information provided by another human information content provider.” Congress should codify this.
‘It’s a new world. Large language models churn out speech by the mile. Chatbots hallucinate and write strange things, spewing statements they think are true but are false—like many politicians. Both OpenAI and Microsoft have been sued for defamation for their chatbot’s output. Congress and courts should label generative AI companies as publishers, which they are, with all the ensuing copyright and liability issues. They will fight it tooth and nail, but let’s call a bot a bot—they don’t host, they publish.’
America’s Ambitious Climate Plan Is Faltering
Isn’t the climate too important to have to suffer through dilatory regulation?
‘New York state’s aggressive goal of getting 70% of its electricity from renewables by 2030 has been upended by permit delays, rising costs and the cancellation of several early offshore-wind projects.’
Argentina Scrapped Its Rent Controls. Now the Market Is Thriving.
Millei is blazing a path. What if reversing bad policy and shuttering government agencies stimulated the economy?
‘The result: The Argentine capital is undergoing a rental-market boom. Landlords are rushing to put their properties back on the market, with Buenos Aires rental supplies increasing by over 170%. While rents are still up in nominal terms, many renters are getting better deals than ever, with a 40% decline in the real price of rental properties when adjusted for inflation since last October, said Federico González Rouco, an economist at Buenos Aires-based Empiria Consultores.
‘Milei’s move to undo rent-control regulations has resulted in one of the clearest-cut victories for what he calls “economic shock therapy.” He is methodically taking apart a system of price controls, closing government agencies and lifting trade restrictions built up over eight decades of socialist and military rule in an effort that has upended the lives of many Argentines.’
No More Pencils, No More Books in Arizona
Should parents have the right to purchase educational materials for their children? Well, in Arizona, being able to do so with government funds is in peril.
Rich parents will still be able to buy whatever they want; ESA funds didn’t matter as much to them. Consider this new government control a regressive tax that falls disproportionately on the lower and middle classes. They’ll have to take what the government permits them and like it.
‘This isn’t the first attempt to dismantle the ESA. Gov. Katie Hobbs tried earlier this year to inflict similarly burdensome regulations. State lawmakers rejected her efforts. Only days later, Ms. Mayes launched her offensive. In a July 1 letter, she threatened Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne with charges of public-funds misuse if his office continued to let parents purchase materials not listed in a specific curriculum subject to approval by the state.
‘Ms. Mayes’s demands contradict not only the rules of the State Board of Education, but also Arizona law. In 2020 Mr. Horne’s predecessor, Kathy Hoffman, also tried to obstruct ESA. But as then-state Sen. Sylvia Allen declared on the Senate floor, anything “provided in our public school classrooms should be provided for a student under an ESA. Why should a parent not be allowed to have flashcards?” Then-Gov. Doug Ducey and the Legislature agreed and codified new, broader rules allowing such purchases. Parents were given freedom to decide what their children need. But thanks to Ms. Mayes, Arizona families again find themselves under administrative assault.’
American healthcare is a Rube Goldberg machine.
If the intent was to ensure that people in catastrophic situations had affordable healthcare, there were far simpler and less expensive solutions to the problem.
It’s like the scene in Armageddon when NASA presents its concept of what should be in a mining vehicle. Harry realizes that they stole his design and then executed poorly.
They should have listened to the experts.
‘The ACA made the individual market less like health insurance (in which people don’t know whether they will get sick or have an injury in a given period, so they buy insurance, and the premiums of those who don’t get sick or have injuries cover the costs of those who do) and more like an extremely expensive high-risk pool that stays afloat only with massive government subsidies. This is an inefficient structure that harms patients with low-quality plans, healthy people (while disincentivizing healthy behavior) with high-cost plans, and American families who bear a great tax burden from financing this scheme. There are benefits, as some people would not have been able to get coverage without the provisions that require insurers to offer plans to every applicant and not charge the sick more than the healthy. However, the number of beneficiaries is small relative to the number of losers.
‘Big insurers and their enablers in the policy community and the media want an outcome in which people who use little, if any, medical care have no choice of lower-cost options and are forced into the single market with very high premiums. Of course, most of these people would never buy this coverage with their own money. Thus, we have the main story of the ACA — massive subsidies to get people into the market, buying an overpriced product for what they need in order to cross-subsidize those who expect to use a lot of medical care. And these subsidies go directly to health insurers, which have enjoyed soaring profits under the ACA. The ACA’s subsidies cost more than $100 billion a year and its Medicaid expansion costs more than that, yet American health has not improved. There are ways to redirect this money in a manner that permits greater health-care freedom and improves coverage for the sick.’
When I lived in Boston for a couple of years, I was shocked to see how people treated stop signs there. I was told it was more of a guide than a rule.
This is true of every bureaucratic directive. It’s an option on slowing things down. It works until it doesn’t.
‘Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has written a letter asking that the Crane Clean Energy Center - formerly known as Three Mile Island - be allowed to skip the regulatory queue which would mean waiting years, be fast tracked onto the grid, and brought immediately online.’
Behind Microsoft’s AI Power Deal
Would Microsoft being resurrecting Three Mile Island’s nuclear plant if it weren’t for the de facto banning of other types of baseload capacity?
‘A growing problem is that coal and natural gas plants are closing prematurely amid an onslaught of regulation and heavily subsidized renewables. Wind and solar power can turn a profit running only some of the time. Baseload power plants can’t—especially as they’re burdened by costly new Environmental Protection Agency rules.
‘The EPA finalized its Clean Power Plan 2.0 that will require coal and new or refurbished gas plants to implement carbon-capture technology by 2032. Such technology isn’t economic or feasible now, so coal plants will have to shut down. This threatens grid reliability, four regional grid operators warn in a friend-of-court brief supporting a challenge to the rule by 27 states.’
The House Rejects the Biden EV Mandate
Politicians can say that they won’t ban this or they won’t mandate that.
Technically, they’re correct. It’s often the agencies that do the heavy lifting with over-reaching rules.
‘The House on Friday voted, 215-191, to overturn the Environmental Protection Agency’s vehicle emissions rule, with eight Democrats joining Republicans. Kamala Harris says she doesn’t support an electric vehicle mandate, but that’s what the Biden EPA rule effectively is.
‘The EPA in March finalized greenhouse gas emissions requirements for auto makers through 2032. EPA’s models show that gas-powered cars will make up no more than 30% of sales by 2032. EVs made up a mere 7.6% of auto sales last year and less than 4% for General Motors and Ford. In eight years they will have to increase their EV sales by some 15-fold.
‘The emissions standards are especially punitive for U.S. manufacturers that mostly sell trucks and SUVs. Companies will effectively have to produce one to two electric trucks for every gas-powered one in 2027 and closer to four to one by 2032. Yet electric trucks cost much more to produce than sedans since they require much bigger batteries.’