With help from John Hendel

LAS VEGAS — The floor at CES this year isn’t just full of tech companies hawking their newest wares — it’s also packed with think-tankers bringing their own perspective to the convention’s ongoing conversation about how tech is shaping society, and vice versa.

The wonks aren’t just here to talk. They want to see what these new gadgets actually do. Policy experts and staffers on both sides of the aisle have a vested interest in getting up to speed on the kinds of consumer-facing gadgets on display here, the better to manage — and argue about — their potential impact on people’s lives.

Jordan Shapiro, an economic and data policy analyst at the center-left Progressive Policy Institute, described her eagerness to understand exactly what kind of data-harvesting capabilities are built into the next generation of tech, and what the costs and benefits are.

"We want biometric data to be private, but also we need biometric data if we want to make bionic arms, or if we want cars to be able to understand when humans are not paying attention to the road," she said. "I'm really curious to see what types of consumer electronics are starting to collect that hopefully private, but also really high-tech, personalized data."

When it comes to tech, PPI occupies an interesting place in the think-tank firmament: A liberal shop, but one affiliated with the moderate New Democrat Coalition. Shapiro and her colleagues described to me, across a marble table in the food court of Vegas’ Venetian Resort, how they think industry, the left, and the right can potentially find a middle ground to push tech innovation forward while protecting the public interest.

Even among some thinkers on the right today, there’s a growing consensus that the ethos of “permissionless innovation” that’s defined American tech policy over the past few decades has in large part created the big-picture problems with tech Congress now must tackle. The extent of smartphone data collection and the deleterious side effects of social media, to name two examples, didn’t appear on Washington’s radar until long after they’d taken their toll. There’s a palpable sense at CES that both sides want that to change.

"There is a consumer side that perhaps isn't always reflected in the push towards innovation," Shapiro said. "The tech folks want help balancing the subjects they're not always as aware of, like ethics, philosophy, consumer protection, and navigating the regulatory environment while still being allowed to grow and flourish."

So it’s not just regulation-friendly, Democratic-aligned think tanks who have skin in the game. We’ve covered extensively how innovation-minded policy thinkers on the right have set their sights on tech as a tool in the struggle for global competitiveness and to rejuvenate American industry. They’re here too.

I spoke today with Brandon Pugh, the director of cyber, privacy and emerging threats at the free-market R Street Institute, who landed in Vegas this week with a mind to hatch new ideas about how government can get more active in the tech world without adding too much friction to the sector’s innovation.

One issue he sees as crucial: A stronger push on cybersecurity at the federal level, something that will only become more salient with the rise of quantum computing and sophisticated AI technology.

“I made a loud request internally that we should have representation here on the cyber[security] side,” Pugh told me. “I think there’s a balance. Government should not be too involved in everyday life, but cyber is an important exception… if we don’t have federal law, states will continue to make their own, which is a nightmare for bureaucracy, consumers, and security all at the same time.”

If it’s unexpected for a free-marketeer to be calling for a new national law, that’s just one of many examples of how the accelerating rate of tech innovation is scrambling American politics. Whatever their motivations, tech policy thinkers are increasingly pushing for the same things: Greater consumer protections; more transparency and accountability on the part of tech giants; and a robust support system for domestic innovation and industry to help the U.S. compete with China.

"In the think-tank world on the right, the conversations they're having about some of these issues are coming from a completely different direction," said PPI tech policy analyst Malena Dailey, citing issues like censorship of conservative viewpoints. But as she acknowledged,and was apparent in my conversations today, they frequently arrive in the same place: "So there is room for compromise. It might just be in a different spot."

Plenty of those spots are on the agenda this week, including an upcoming panel today about blockchain competitiveness, talks on fostering domestic innovation and market competition and how a shifting global trade environment affects all of it. Stay tuned for our coverage tomorrow and Saturday.

It’s not all surprising new alliances here: there are some familiar tensions on display as well, and their outcome could determine what the tech industry ends up looking like over the next generation.

Big tech companies are clearly very frustrated with some of President Joe Biden’s progressive Washington regulators, and not afraid to put that front and center.

During his Thursday morning “State of the Industry” remarks kicking off the conference, Consumer Technology Association head Gary Shapiro accused the Federal Trade Commission, now led by Chair Lina Khan, of risking wide-ranging consequences by pivoting away from the long held antitrust standard that consumer welfare should drive its reviews of M&A deals.

As a thinker and regulator, Khan is known for her views that tech monopolies may need to be evaluated by standards that go beyond the old model of whether corporate behavior hurts consumers. Khan and other critics of this consumer welfare standard have argued it may be poorly suited to evaluating marketplaces in an era full of free online services.

The FTC has “shifted to a new standard — what’s best to protect the existing competitors, which is the actual antithesis of innovation, the antithesis of a free market system and the antithesis of getting to a more innovative economy,” Shapiro warned on the CES stage. “And it will hurt our U.S. leadership, we believe, and I’ve heard this not only from the biggest companies but the smallest companies.

“It hurts the small companies because they want to be able to invest and they want to be able to get the money for investment,” the CTA chief added. “Being sold to a big company is one of the ways you exit.”

The complaint is hardly a new one for Shapiro and other industry representatives, but it’s a sign of how much Washington is occupying attention at CES this year going into 2023.

Of course, the FTC isn’t sold that Shapiro — who dubbed himself “the paid cheerleader for the tech industry” — is accurately characterizing the agency’s efforts.

“The work of the Federal Trade Commission is rooted in congressional authority dating back over a century and supported by substantial judicial precedent,” an FTC spokesperson told me when asked about Shapiro’s remarks. “The laws we enforce oblige us to seek to prevent unfair methods of competition, and by doing so we spur innovation, protect consumers, and benefit the American economy.” — John Hendel

• Chinese researchers are claiming quantum codebreaking ability, ahead of schedule.
• Meanwhile, Covid and economic headwinds are hampering the country’s chipmaking efforts.
• The FTX collapse caused mayhem at crypto-focused Silvergate Capital.
• What does it mean that Coinbase’s stock rose after a $100 million settlement?
• Researchers are trying to discover the cause of a decline in big scientific breakthroughs.

Stay in touch with the whole team: Ben Schreckinger ([email protected]); Derek Robertson ([email protected]); Steve Heuser ([email protected]); and Benton Ives ([email protected]). Follow us @DigitalFuture on Twitter.

If you’ve had this newsletter forwarded to you, you can sign up and read our mission statement at the links provided.