3 ms·

It's not a very good paper, even though the author has reasonable credentials in Europe. She writes: "For example, just as legislatures rely on independent leg

It's not a very good paper, even though the author has reasonable credentials in Europe. She writes: "For example, just as legislatures rely on independent legal teams to help draft legislation that will survive court challenges, they also need independent technology experts they can turn to for reliable information. Making tech expertise available to lawmakers would go a long way toward reducing lobbyists’ effectiveness and ensuring lawmakers understand how technology impacts issues like healthcare, education, justice, housing, and transportation." This shows insufficient knowledge of the US situation. The U.S. Congress used to have an Office of Technology Assessment.[1] It was abolished in 1995. "House Republican legislators characterized the OTA as wasteful and hostile to GOP interests." The generic problem is monopolies, not "tech". US banks and drug stores are down to 2-3 major players. Tough enforcement of the Sherman Act might help. Although the experience with the AT&T breakup is not encouraging. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessmen...

BehindBlueEyes 2y ago
I don't see how you conclude from that quote that she doesn't know about the office of technology or lacks understanding of the US context. When I read making tech expertise available, I'm not picturing a government science department doing research, I'm picturing independent consultants translating algorithms into english. If anything, your point shows the bipartisan us vs. them is the main problem if claiming bias against a party is enough to get rid of something disliked. Is that what you mean by monopolies? And to be clear, I agree monopolies are an issue, but that doesn't negate other issues such the fact tech solutions can result in enforcing implicit rules that weren't decided through democratic process despite impacting populations at the same level a government decision would.

BehindBlueEyes 2y ago

I don't see how you conclude from that quote that she doesn't know about the office of technology or lacks understanding of the US context. When I read making tech expertise available, I'm not picturing a government science department doing research, I'm picturing independent consultants translating algorithms into english. If anything, your point shows the bipartisan us vs. them is the main problem if claiming bias against a party is enough to get rid of something disliked. Is that what you mean by monopolies? And to be clear, I agree monopolies are an issue, but that doesn't negate other issues such the fact tech solutions can result in enforcing implicit rules that weren't decided through democratic process despite impacting populations at the same level a government decision would.