Hi from Los Angeles, where I am moderating an Axios roundtable exploring solutions to the affordable housing crisis. And thanks to tech editor Scott Rosenberg for making sure you have more to read than just this intro.
Illustration: NurPhoto/Getty Images
While world leaders joined with tech companies to sign a pact to combat terrorists and extremists online, the White House broke from the agreement and offered its own tool Wednesday for countering what it sees as censorship by tech platforms, Axios' Sara Fischer reports.
Why it matters: The move is a signal that the White House is looking to step up its fight against Silicon Valley companies over accusations of bias rather than work with them and its allies to reduce online threats.
Driving the news: On Wednesday, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris announced a call to action that will addresses the abuse of technology to spread terrorist content and extremism.
Hours later, the White House launched a new tool that will allow any U.S. citizen to submit a complaint if they think they were unfairly censored on social media platforms.
The big picture: Social media bias has become a major talking point for President Trump and conservatives who argue that Silicon Valley companies are censoring their perspectives.
Be smart: This attitude demonstrates a reversal of Trump's welcoming view of social media platforms when he was running for office.
What's next: Expect questions from congressional Democrats and free speech activists about what the White House intends to do with the data and responses it collects from its new complaint tool.
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
The debate over regulating the power of giant tech companies has rapidly moved on from "whether" to "how," writes Axios' David McCabe.
Why it matters: Today's arguments among companies, academics and regulators over acceptable fixes for the concentration of tech power will set the boundaries of tomorrow's legislation and court decisions.
Driving the news: At a conference at the University of Chicago's business school this week, participants are weighing a series of proposals for introducing more competition into the tech space and addressing other concerns about digital platforms.
Key question: How far should governments go, and what tools should they use.
One idea that received substantial attention was the creation of a new independent regulator — as opposed to encouraging the Federal Trade Commission to crack down on tech, or giving it more power.
Yes, but: There were some at the conference, like conservative economist Tyler Cowen, who remained doubtful about broad concerns around corporate concentration in America.
Our thought bubble: Putting the tech giants under new scrutiny, with executives testifying multiple times in the last year, might have been the easy part for global regulators. Figuring out a lasting solution will be a more drawn-out battle.
The last two presidents have been resistant to formalizing a cybersecurity strategy.
What's new: The new Cybersecurity Solarium Commission hopes that by replicating the process President Eisenhower used to form a nuclear strategy in the 1950s, they can develop one that will last, Axios' Joe Uchill reports.
The big picture: Presidents Obama and now Trump have argued that formalizing how the U.S. will combat cyberattacks reduces the executive branch's agility.
Details: The commission, which formally launched last week, is a 14-member task force composed of 4 current lawmakers; directors or deputy directors of National Intelligence, Defense, the FBI and Homeland Security; and representatives from academia and industry.
Go deeper: Read Joe's full post here.
IIlustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios
The criminal justice system has eagerly taken up AI tools for surveillance, policing and sentencing — software that can track people's faces, deploy patrols where crime appears most likely, and recommend whether to grant bail.
Why it matters: One problem is that these tools are often cloaked in secrecy, so it can be impossible to judge their accuracy, or even know where and how they are being used, Axios' Kaveh Waddell writes. Critics say this opens the door to misuse and discrimination.
Driving the news: San Francisco yesterday approved the most restrictive government surveillance regulations in the U.S.
Between the lines: When poorly coded or deployed, AI systems can make huge mistakes or harm some groups more than others. But where faulty facial recognition in Snapchat might mean some people can't use a fun filter, flawed police software can land the wrong people in jail.
Go deeper: Read Kaveh's full story.
Has Pinterest grown so powerful in its aesthetic hegemony that we must call in the antitrust cops? "It's time to break up Pinterest," Mike Shields writes.