While I see the value in exploring the ideological infrastructure supporting the authoritarian turn amongst digital elites, I think Dave Karpf is right to argue that the material driver is a pushback by venture capitalists, whose interests are not identical with big tech, against increasing regulation of the sector:
This, by the way, is the main reason why so much of Silicon Valley has decided to embrace the candidacy of former President Donald Trump. It isn’t that tech leaders necessarily love incompetent authoritarians. It isn’t because they believe any of his promises. It’s that they have spent 3.5 years facing Lina Khan at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and they cannot handle answering to a competent regulator anymore.
The FTC published a spicy memo last month, warning AI companies not to misrepresent what their services are or can do.
“Your therapy bots aren’t licensed psychologists, your AI girlfriends are neither girls nor friends, your griefbots have no soul, and your AI copilots are not gods. We’ve warned companies about making false or unsubstantiated claims about AI or algorithms. And we’ve followed up with actions, including recent cases against WealthPress, DK Automation, Automaters AI, and CRI Genetics. We’ve also repeatedly advised companies – with reference to past cases – not to use automated tools to mislead people about what they’re seeing, hearing, or reading.”
This is what the “Little Tech Agenda” is fighting against. They are opposed to having an FTC that prevents outright fraud. But if the government actually protects consumers, a16z’s investment portfolio may take a big hit. This is why many VCs would much prefer autocracy to accountability
https://www.techpolicy.press/the-little-tech-agenda-is-just-selfserving-nonsense/
Mark Carrigan 