Am I getting this right?

Yeah, I mean, and it really kind of gets to my earlier point about how do we approach technology policy overall, right? And a data center is a form of technology.

And do we want to put in place a regulatory regime that assumes that technology is stagnant, that there's only one good way to cool a data center, and that a data center can only use this much power? And then you lock in place these standards where you prevent potential innovation in that space.

to use less water, to use electricity more efficiently.

You want to have that sort of diversity in the industry.

And data centers don't exist in a legal vacuum, right? These are facilities that have to comply with existing every existing rule that's out there, whether it's a local rule about noise ordinances or whether it's a federal environmental regulation, data centers have to comply.

And so it's about making sure that regulation, again, doesn't treat something like a monolith and doesn't treat something It doesn't allow for an industry to grow and develop because there's every incentive in the world for anybody that's operating a data center to use electricity as efficiently as possible and to use as little water as possible because we have to pay for those things.

I'm worried about the legislation from government.

During our conversation, I asked him about a couple of the major concerns that many people have regarding data center projects, such as them putting a strain on the electrical grid or draining water.

On the electricity front, for example, the- A lot of studies have shown so far that it's not actually the data centers that are causing increases in electricity prices.

And when I mean that concerns are legitimate, I, I understand that people are experiencing higher electric rates.

Um, there's a lot that goes into what is actually in your power bill, and data centers are actually have been found by a couple of, uh, peer-reviewed studies to show that they actually suppress the s- fixed cost of the grid.

Uh, but what's exciting about data centers is these are companies that are capital flush that are able to come in and say, "We're gonna put in a data center.

We're also gonna pay, help pay to upgrade the grid, and maybe even bring our own power." The big thing that stands in the way is ultimately permitting and regulation.

And when it comes to other resources like water, uh, it doesn't make a lot of sense to go into a place that doesn't have the resources necessary to do business, especially when a business i- like a data center, needs to be online 24/7.

Patrick Hedger at NetChoice stressed to me that Americans sit at a critical juncture in the AI era, and how we choose to handle data centers will dictate the future of the internet and our economy.

How much of this how much of the fear stoked against A.I. do you think has to do with people that want to get degrees that won't make any money? And this sucks, quite frankly.

Yeah, we were seeing the market give us these signals well before chat GPT ever came on this on the scene before anybody really knew how close this type of powerful AI was.

The market was already kind of screaming and saying, hey, we need more skilled labor.

And that's why you were seeing, you know, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, HVAC technicians, blacksmiths.

generating hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in salaries versus, again, somebody with a four-year liberal arts degree that may be struggling to find work.

These trends were here with us before AI was really on the scene.

Now you've got AI sort of as a convenient scapegoat for what was already sort of a misalignment of resources in the marketplace.

Speak to us about why America should be investing in AI so heavily and so rapidly.

Am I wrong?

No, you're absolutely right about that.

What we've seen is China is really engaged in a form of digital colonialism.

They have hard colonialism where they're building a lot of, uh, infrastructure and, and putting a lot of debt onto companies, or excuse, excuse me, countries, um, and trying to bring them essentially into their orbit through this Belt and Road Initiative, um, where China's building ports and s- railroads and road systems to highways and cellular networks, um, really sort of in the Global South where you see large population increases.

So the question is essentially, in the next, the next billion people that are gonna come online and start using AI systems or other parts of the internet, are, are they gonna be using American systems or are they gonna be using Chinese systems? Are they get ...

Are, are developers in Malaysia or Indonesia or Nigeria, are they gonna be using Chinese AI and are they gonna be learning information shaped by the Chinese Communist Party? Are they gonna be utilizing American systems and powered by American data centers? That's really the question that faces us, where China is essentially able to bring the rest of the world into its orbit because the rest of the world is dependent on its infrastructure, its digital infrastructure, or are they going to be customers of the United States?

Your response.

Yeah.

How much of this how much of the fear stoked against A.I. do you think has to do with people that went and got degrees that won't make any money? And this sucks, quite frankly.

Yeah, we were seeing the market give us these signals well before chat GPT ever came on this on the scene before anybody really knew how close this type of powerful AI was.

The market was already kind of screaming and saying, hey, we need more skilled labor.

And that's why you were seeing, you know, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, HVAC technicians, blacksmiths.

generating you know hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in salaries um versus you know again somebody with a four-year liberal arts degree um that may be struggling to find work these trends were here with us before ai was really on the scene now you've got ai sort of as a convenient scapegoat for what was already sort of a misalignment of resources in the marketplace i don't think our k-12 system frankly is has been designed properly to be able to put late you know to generate workers for the jobs that are currently in demand.

There's nothing wrong with going and getting a trade school degree when the market is screaming and saying, hey, you can get a six-figure job with less than two years of education, professional education, and almost no debt versus kids that are struggling to pay off their debt after getting these four-year degrees.

I mean, really, we see right now in the education sector that I think it's upwards of 50%, close to 50% of people that enter a four-year school never graduate.

Speak to us about why America should be investing in AI so heavily and so rapidly.

Am I wrong?

wrong?No, you're absolutely right about that.

What we've seen is China is really engaged in a form of digital colonialism.

They have hard colonialism, where they're building a lot of, uh, infrastructure and, uh, and putting a lot of debt onto companies... or excuse, excuse me, countries, um, and trying to bring them essentially into their orbit through this Belt and Road Initiative, um, where China's building ports and s- railroads and road systems to highways and cellular networks, um, really sort of in the Global South, where you see large population increases.

So the question is essentially, in the next, the next billion people that are gonna come online and start using AI systems or other parts of the internet, are, are they gonna be using American systems, or are they gonna be using Chinese systems? Are they g- are, are developers in Malaysia or Indonesia or Nigeria, are they gonna be using Chinese AI, and are they gonna be learning information shaped by the Chinese Communist Party? Are they gonna be utilizing American systems and powered by American data centers? That's really the question that faces us, where China is essentially able to bring the rest of the world into its orbit because the rest of the world is dependent on its infrastructure, its digital infrastructure, or are they going to be customers of the United States?

Your response.

Yeah, so the Trump administration's done a great job at sort of elevating, um, what localities and states can already do to assuage people's concerns related to data centers.

And, uh, and EPA Administrator Zeldin is exactly right that, uh, studies have shown that where a data center goes in, uh, you're able to lower property taxes because they pay an enormous amount of property taxes and use very few municipal services.

What are your thoughts?

Yeah, you know, I, I understand folks have a lot of, you know, legitimate concerns about rising electricity prices, water usage, and noise, but I wanna assure folks that, you know, data centers, there's no exemption from any sort of state, local, or federal law for data centers.

They have to comply with all sorts of regulations related to pollution, noise, land use, water use, electricity use.

They pay for their own electricity.

And the data that we're seeing, the studies that we're seeing are showing that data centers are actually helping suppress the rise in electricity prices that we're seeing in this country.

You know, I find it really ironic that Maine was close to the first state to put a moratorium on data centers- There's practically no data centers to speak of in Maine, yet they have some of the most expensive electricity in this country.

So obviously something else is going on, and data centers are being-

So for a lot of people, it's gonna be hard for them to believe that somehow a data center tapping into the ele- to the electrical grid is gonna save money for anybody.

Would you mind telling my audience what people in Europe are up against? Because I don't think Americans can even imagine the kind of limitations on free speech that a lot of those Western European countries are happy to impose on their own people.

Yeah, what they're up against is a world without the First Amendment and that the First Amendment is incredibly unique.

And so we should be very thankful to have it here in the United States because what the Europeans are dealing with Both in the United Kingdom and in the European Union, you have laws such as the Digital Services Act in Europe and then the Online Safety Act in the United Kingdom that, of course, are passed in the name of online safety, keeping kids safe, keeping families safe.

But what it's leading to is mass censorship and companies that are even just shutting down because they don't want to deal with the bureaucratic compliance and the potentially ruinous fines that are associated with these laws.

Blogs on completely banal topics such as parenting advice have shut down in the United Kingdom because of these types of laws.

So that's what the Europeans are up against.

I frankly don't care.

Yes, what the United States government is doing is this initiative to provide a portal for Europeans and other folks in countries that don't have access to free speech online to access vital information-based services that are being restricted.

What is your reaction to that?

I mean, it's, you know, surprising that, uh, in his c- uh, length of his career how immature and-- he can be on these issues.

It's, it's really naive for him to, uh, believe this.

I mean, th- this is the major, uh, technological revolution of our lifetimes, um, and he's sort of suggesting, um, that we ought to cooperate with our greatest geopolitical rival.

Um, we already know what China's position on this is.

They're trying to do everything possible to slow down America's development of AI.

Uh, they're funding campaigns here in the United States against, uh, the necessary infrastructure to build out American AI.

Talk to us about the stakes of this race we have against China over AI.

What is your reaction to that?

I mean, it's, you know, it's surprising that, uh, in his c- uh, length of his career how immature and...

he can be on these issues.

It's, it's really naive for him to, uh, believe this.

I mean, th- this is the major, uh, technological revolution of our lifetimes.

Um, and he's sort of suggesting, um, that we ought to cooperate with our greatest geopolitical rival.

Um, we already know what China's position on this is.

Talk to us about the stakes of this race we have against China over AI.

Your thoughts?

Yeah, so this is one area where Congress has dropped the ball.

And even before AI has become as prolific as it is now, we've been asking for Congress to pass a national data privacy and data security standard.

And that would apply to the information that your grocery store collects about you, forget AI.

So that's something that Congress should do.

But providing that regulatory certainty for the industry is what this framework for AI does.

And it asks Congress to do that because right now what we have is a bunch of different bills moving, over 1,000 bills moving in the states that would regulate this technology in ways that sometimes would conflict with one another.

We need that in a critical way, don't we?

Where do you think this is tilting? Do you think that there's enough consensus that a federal framework will become the norm, or do you think the states want to carve it up yelling states' rights?

You know, if you look at the previous, uh, information age, the dawn of the internet, w-- a federal framework is what allowed for America to produce the world-leading technology companies that we have today that are poised to deliver American AI dominance around the globe in the future.

Um, but so we have to understand that a overarching federal framework for this technology is ideal.

It's what is, is, is probably the best guarantee of continued American dominance in this important technology space.

But there are certain things that states can do.

I think what we need to, uh-- We need to enhance this discussion a little bit by talking about, uh, the different types of regulations that are out there.

There are regulations that insert bureaucrats into the innovation and design process, and then there are regulations that target specific misuses of technology, and we need to allot-- focus more on the latter there.

What's being done to educate communities that are about to face a decision on a data center or some other, uh, component of the AI infrastructure to make sure they understand the full picture, not just the NIMBY, uh, dynamic that often crops up when these things happen in a community?

Patrick, your thoughts.

Yeah, I think you said it perfectly.

This is a huge opportunity to emphasize how much the internet has been a true soft power export for the United States.

It's been the key tool in exporting our values overseas, and that's also generated a lot of wealth for Americans.

The Europeans are jealous of that, and they've built these new regulations, both the Digital Services Act in the European Union and the Online Safety Act in the United Kingdom, that have resulted in a clampdown on speech that would otherwise be legal here in the United States and huge fines on American technology companies.

So this is a really good avenue to show the rest of the world just how far their governments have gone in regulating their freedoms.

But Educating that population is just as important as educating our own, isn't it?

Yeah, absolutely.

Where do you think this is tilting? Do you think that there's enough consensus that a federal framework will become the norm, or do you think the states want to carve it up yelling states' rights?

You know, if you look at the previous information age, the dawn of the Internet, a federal framework is what allowed for America to produce the world leading technology companies that we have today that are poised to deliver American AI dominance around the globe in the future.

But so we have to understand that a overarching federal framework for this technology is ideal.

It's what is ideal.

probably the best guarantee of continued American dominance in this important technology space.

But there are certain things that states can do.

I think we need to we need to enhance this discussion a little bit by talking about the different types of regulations that are out There are regulations that insert bureaucrats into the innovation and design process, and then there are regulations that target specific misuses of technology.

What's being done to educate communities that are about to face a decision on a data center or some other component of the AI infrastructure to make sure they understand the full picture, not just the NIMBY dynamic that often crops up when these things happen in a community?

What concerns should people have when it comes to AI, when it comes to protecting themselves, whether it's privacy or any other concern?

Yeah.

And so privacy is something where the federal government has dropped the ball.

We should have a national privacy standard as well.

And we're hoping to see that with AI too, because strong, clear rules at the federal level, instead of 50 conflicting rules at the state level would actually be better for innovation, right? You create regulatory certainty.

People know what they're supposed to build to, what the parameters are, but we should really be focused on outcomes, right? Instead of trying to predict the future, instead of trying to micromanage the development and design of these systems, we should be focused on policing misuse and making sure that law enforcement and other consumer protection resources are adequate to address misuse of technology, right? AI, like any other technology, can be misused.

An automobile can be misused.

Give me a couple of things you think are imperative.

Where do you want to start?

Yeah, I think talking about how the administration is continuing to clear out regulatory hurdles, whether that is state regulations that may influence the development of AI models in a negative way.

The Trump administration last night released an executive order to that effect, which is really, really great.

putting in place structures that guarantee that AI will be regulated at the federal level where it should be regulated because it is fundamentally an interstate technology.

But I think you raise an important point about what else the administration is doing in terms of actually making sure that we have the infrastructure necessary to power AI, because it's going to require a lot of electricity.

It's going to require those data centers.

And it's what you said is exactly right.

What do you mean by that? And how much control do we really have?

And so parents already have a fair amount of control, don't they?

Yeah, they've got a lot of control and unfortunately what this bill would do is weaken those controls inherently to allow for different types of software to be loaded onto your phone.

What's kind of nice about the modern operating system is that it's a lot more difficult to get malware onto your phone or things that you don't want on there versus a conventional computer or laptop of the old days where If you clicked on the wrong thing, all of a sudden you could have a virus.

And so by controlling the channels of which software gets onto your phone through an app store and through a vetting process, you see a real reduction in those problems.

And unfortunately, what this bill would do, as well intended as it may be, would blow open a lot of those security protocols that Apple and Google have put in place in their apps review and in the security systems that are inherently built into the phone.

And all of this is in the name of potentially increasing competition, but what it really is is a subsidy to the apps like video games and dating apps to be able to get around the secure payment systems that Apple and Google have for their app stores.

Your thoughts?

Well, you know, Apple and Google's operating systems operate differently.

Give us a handicap on how well the Trump administration has done in beginning to take the regulatory thumb off of progress?

Yeah, so the Trump administration, I'll give them an A-plus in terms of vision.

They've really laid out a great plan in terms of what is necessary to win America's AI race, right? This is the new space race, even.

I think it's even more important than that because the technological applications of AI are far... far greater than anything that we learned from developing rockets.

So not that that wasn't important.

So the A-plus on vision, we just submitted some comments at NetChoice actually to the White House in response to the White House asking what needs to be done to clear the way in terms of AI investment and innovation.

And while we praise the Trump administration's vision, what they really need to do is pay pick up the pace in terms of getting a lot of these old Biden-era rules that are technically still on the books off the books.

What does the data show us?

Eh, I mean, do you think that there was any merit to that type of, um, insight there? I mean, if Google operates the exchange where ads are bought and sold, and they also operate the tools that are helping, you know, um, publishers market their space and also advertisers kinda create the ads that are being published, if they're operating all kind of facets of this exchange, eh, isn't it reasonable to say, "Hey, Google has too much power here?"

So we have to be very careful, again, with w- what we're trying to pursue in antitrust law, and of course, competitors in the marketplace are always going to be looking for a leg up, whether that's through creating a better product and innovating and serving customers better or trying to obtain regulatory privilege.

And we've seen a lot of folks that are trying to push the U.S. government to use antitrust law to create carve-outs for themselves, uh, in this tech economy and in the online advertising economy.

So we have to be very careful.

We have to look at how ultimately consumers are being served, and generally, I think consumers are served well by, uh, more personalized ads, things that are more relevant to them.

Um, and we also, again, back to my earlier point, you have to look at the fact that, uh, other online advertising marketplaces are growing.

Um, and so that shows that there is still robust competition, um, and, you know, we don't wanna put companies in a position where they have to, uh, tie one of their own hands behind their back just to help out their competitors.

We need to be leaders on innovation." Uh, do you have any thoughts on how kind of efforts to rein in big tech accusations of anticompetitive behavior, you know, targeting big tech with expensive litigation, what that does to kind of this big picture AI race, race to be the leader when it comes to technology in the world?