Podcasts about sultan meghji

Kemba Walden and Stewart revisit the National Cybersecurity Strategy a year later. Sultan Meghji examines the ransomware attack on Change Healthcare and its consequences. Brandon Pugh reminds us that even large companies like Google are not immune to having their intellectual property stolen. The group conducts a thorough analysis of a "public option" model for AI development. Brandon discusses the latest developments in personal data and child online protection. Lastly, Stewart inquires about Kemba's new position at Paladin Global Institute, following her departure from the role of Acting National Cyber Director.

Kemba Walden and Stewart revisit the National Cybersecurity Strategy a year later. Sultan Meghji examines the ransomware attack on Change Healthcare and its consequences. Brandon Pugh reminds us that even large companies like Google are not immune to having their intellectual property stolen. The group conducts a thorough analysis of a "public option" model for AI development. Brandon discusses the latest developments in personal data and child online protection. Lastly, Stewart inquires about Kemba's new position at Paladin Global Institute, following her departure from the role of Acting National Cyber Director.

This week, Jordi and G3 welcome Sultan Meghji back to the podcast. As long-time listeners know, when Sultan is the guest, green marbles start flying everywhere.This episode continues in that tradition, but it focuses narrowly on cybersecurity, as Jordi and Sultan believe that cybersecurity isn't getting the attention it deserves by the markets. In fact, while generative AI may have been the key factor driving the equity markets higher last year, 2024 is a new ball game. And cybersecurity – not LLMs – could represent the dominant narrative this year. But according to Jordi, the best way to participate in the “cyber surge” is through Bitcoin.Please check important disclosures at the end of the episode.Timestamps:What is Jordi's point of view on the national threat posed by TikTok? [9:12]How confident is Sultan on the U.S. possessing superior abilities to defend against cyber attacks? [21:46]Is the strong market performance of leading cybersecurity names a reflection of a growing concern of a cyber attack? [25:14]What is the role of decentralization, blockchain, and crypto in combatting cyber attacks? [34:05] What advice does Sultan offer on how to prevent being hacked? [42:18]Resources:Frontier Foundry's websiteUK report on state-sponsored cyber attackersFirst of its kind AI heist AI Voice ScamsWhat ever happened to Alta Vista?Disclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Any health-related information shared on the podcast is not intended as medical advice or for use in self-diagnosis or treatment. Please consult a qualified healthcare professional before acting upon any health-related information on the podcast. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to...

It was a big week for deep fakes generated by artificial intelligence. Sultan Meghji, who's got a new AI startup, walked us through three stories that illustrate the ways AI will lead to more confusion about who's really talking to us. First, a fake Biden robocall urged people not to vote in the New Hampshire primary. Second, a bot purporting to offer Dean Phillips's views on the issues was sanctioned by OpenAI because it didn't have Phillips's consent. Third, fake nudes of Taylor Swift led to a ban on Twitter searches for her image. And, finally, podcasters used AI to resurrect George Carlin and got sued by his family. The moral panic over AI fakery meant that all of these stories were long on “end of the world” and short on “we'll live through this.” Regulators of AI are not doing a better job of maintaining perspective. Mark MacCarthy reports that New York City's AI hiring law, which has punitive disparate-impact disclosure requirements for automated hiring decision engines, seems to have persuaded NYC employers that they aren't making any automated hiring decisions, so they don't have to do any disclosures. Not to be outdone, the European Court of Justice has decided that pretty much any tool to aid in decisions is likely to be an automated decision making technology subject to special (and mostly nonsensical) data protection rules. Is AI regulation creating its own backlash? Could be. Sultan and I report on a very plausible Republican plan to attack the Biden AI executive order on the ground that its main enforcement mechanism relies, the Defense Production Act, simply doesn't authorize what the order calls for. Speaking of regulation, Maury Shenk covers the EU's application of the Digital Markets Act to big tech companies like Apple and Google. Apple isn't used to being treated like just another company, and its contemptuous response to the EU's rules for its app market could easily lead to regulatory sanctions. Looking at Apple's proposed compliance with the California court ruling in the Epic case and the European Digital Market Act, Mark says it's time to think about price regulating mobile app stores. Even handing out big checks to technology companies turns out to be harder than it first sounds. Sultan and I talk about the slow pace of payments to chip makers, and the political imperative to get the deals done before November (and probably before March).  Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore. is still flogging NSA and the danger of government access to personal data. This time, he's on about NSA's purchases of commercial data. So far, so predictable. But this time, he's misrepresented the facts by saying without restriction that NSA buys domestic metadata, omitting NSA's clear statement that its netflow “domestic” data consists of communications with one end outside the country.   Maury and I review an absent colleague's effort to construct a liability regime for insecure software. Jim Dempsey's proposal looks quite reasonable, but Maury reminds me that he and I produced something similar twenty years ago, and it's not even close to adoption anywhere in the U.S.   I can't help but rant about Amazon's arrogant, virtue-signaling, and customer-hating decision to drop a feature that makes it easy for Ring doorbell users to share their videos with the police. Whose data is it, anyway, Amazon? Sadly, we know the answer.  It looks as though there's only one place where hasty, ill-conceived tech regulation is being rolled back. Maury reports on the People's Republic of China, which canned its video game regulations, and its video game regulator for good measure, and started approving new games at a rapid clip, after a proposed regulatory crackdown knocked more than $60 bn off the value of its industry.  We close the news roundup with a few quick hits: Outside of AI, VCs are closing their wallets and letting startups run out of money  Apple launched an expensive dud – the Vision Pro  Quantum winter may be back as quantum computing turns out to be harder than hoped Speaking of winter, self-driving cars are going to need snow tires to get through the latest market and regulatory storms overtaking companies like Cruise  Finally, as a listener bonus, we turn to Rob Silvers, Under Secretary for Policy at the Department of Homeland Security and Chair of the Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB). Under Rob's leadership, DHS has proposed legislation to give the CSRB a legislative foundation. The Senate homeland security committee recently held a hearing about that idea. Rob wasn't invited, so we asked him to come on the podcast to respond to issues that the hearing raised – conflicts of interest, subpoena power, choosing the incidents to investigate, and more. Download 489th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

It was a big week for deep fakes generated by artificial intelligence. Sultan Meghji, who's got a new AI startup, walked us through three stories that illustrate the ways AI will lead to more confusion about who's really talking to us. First, a fake Biden robocall urged people not to vote in the New Hampshire primary. Second, a bot purporting to offer Dean Phillips's views on the issues was sanctioned by OpenAI because it didn't have Phillips's consent. Third, fake nudes of Taylor Swift led to a ban on Twitter searches for her image. And, finally, podcasters used AI to resurrect George Carlin and got sued by his family. The moral panic over AI fakery meant that all of these stories were long on “end of the world” and short on “we'll live through this.” Regulators of AI are not doing a better job of maintaining perspective. Mark MacCarthy reports that New York City's AI hiring law, which has punitive disparate-impact disclosure requirements for automated hiring decision engines, seems to have persuaded NYC employers that they aren't making any automated hiring decisions, so they don't have to do any disclosures. Not to be outdone, the European Court of Justice has decided that pretty much any tool to aid in decisions is likely to be an automated decision making technology subject to special (and mostly nonsensical) data protection rules. Is AI regulation creating its own backlash? Could be. Sultan and I report on a very plausible Republican plan to attack the Biden AI executive order on the ground that its main enforcement mechanism relies, the Defense Production Act, simply doesn't authorize what the order calls for. Speaking of regulation, Maury Shenk covers the EU's application of the Digital Markets Act to big tech companies like Apple and Google. Apple isn't used to being treated like just another company, and its contemptuous response to the EU's rules for its app market could easily lead to regulatory sanctions. Looking at Apple's proposed compliance with the California court ruling in the Epic case and the European Digital Market Act, Mark says it's time to think about price regulating mobile app stores. Even handing out big checks to technology companies turns out to be harder than it first sounds. Sultan and I talk about the slow pace of payments to chip makers, and the political imperative to get the deals done before November (and probably before March).  Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore. is still flogging NSA and the danger of government access to personal data. This time, he's on about NSA's purchases of commercial data. So far, so predictable. But this time, he's misrepresented the facts by saying without restriction that NSA buys domestic metadata, omitting NSA's clear statement that its netflow “domestic” data consists of communications with one end outside the country.   Maury and I review an absent colleague's effort to construct a liability regime for insecure software. Jim Dempsey's proposal looks quite reasonable, but Maury reminds me that he and I produced something similar twenty years ago, and it's not even close to adoption anywhere in the U.S.   I can't help but rant about Amazon's arrogant, virtue-signaling, and customer-hating decision to drop a feature that makes it easy for Ring doorbell users to share their videos with the police. Whose data is it, anyway, Amazon? Sadly, we know the answer.  It looks as though there's only one place where hasty, ill-conceived tech regulation is being rolled back. Maury reports on the People's Republic of China, which canned its video game regulations, and its video game regulator for good measure, and started approving new games at a rapid clip, after a proposed regulatory crackdown knocked more than $60 bn off the value of its industry.  We close the news roundup with a few quick hits: Outside of AI, VCs are closing their wallets and letting startups run out of money  Apple launched an expensive dud – the Vision Pro  Quantum winter may be back as quantum computing turns out to be harder than hoped Speaking of winter, self-driving cars are going to need snow tires to get through the latest market and regulatory storms overtaking companies like Cruise  Finally, as a listener bonus, we turn to Rob Silvers, Under Secretary for Policy at the Department of Homeland Security and Chair of the Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB). Under Rob's leadership, DHS has proposed legislation to give the CSRB a legislative foundation. The Senate homeland security committee recently held a hearing about that idea. Rob wasn't invited, so we asked him to come on the podcast to respond to issues that the hearing raised – conflicts of interest, subpoena power, choosing the incidents to investigate, and more. Download 489th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

In this episode, recorded on Wednesday, October 25th, G3 welcomes Sultan Meghji and Mike Edwards to the show to discuss the unfolding war in the Middle East. Please note that we all recognize the terrible carnage that has taken place and in no way want to be insensitive to it. However, this podcast is designed to look at events through a markets angle. As such, while our hearts are heavy, we will be adhering to that approach. Please check important disclosures at the end of the episode. Timestamps:Is Israel's postponement of the ground incursion into Gaza an escalation or de-escalation of the war? [2:22] What is Mike's perspective on Iran's intentions behind alerting Israel about the Oct. 7 attack? [16:10]What are the implications for defense spending as a result of the war? [24:50]Why does Sultan view space infrastructure as being critical to both U.S. military capabilities and the stability of the economy? [32:09]How could the recent events in the Middle East influence the price of crude oil? [39:37]Does Mike anticipate that the Middle East War will have any impact on the candidates vying for the GOP presidential nomination? [50:46]Resources: Sultan's start-up, Frontier FoundrySultan's BiographyThe current “warm war” in spaceUkraine's 3D printed bombsDisclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Any health-related information shared on the podcast is not intended as medical advice or for use in self-diagnosis or treatment. Please consult a qualified healthcare professional before acting upon any health-related information on the podcast. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to review related disclosures and learn more about Weiss.

That's the question I have after the latest episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast. Jeffery Atik lays out the government's best case: that it artificially bolstered its dominance in search by paying to be the default search engine everywhere. That's not exactly an unassailable case, at least in my view, and the government doesn't inspire confidence when it starts out of the box by suggesting it lacks evidence because Google did such a good job of suppressing “bad” internal corporate messages. Plus, if paying for defaults is bad, what's the remedy–not paying for them? Assigning default search engines at random? That would set trust-busting back a generation with consumers.  There are still lots of turns to the litigation, but the Justice Department has some work to do. The other big story of the week was the opening of Schumer University on the Hill, with closed-door Socratic tutorials on AI policy issues for legislators. Sultan Meghji suspects that, for all the kumbaya moments, agreement on a legislative solution will be hard to come by. Jim Dempsey sees more opportunity for agreement, although he too is not optimistic that anything will pass, pointing to the odd-couple proposal by Senators Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) for a framework that denies 230-style immunity and requires registration and audits of AI models overseen by a new agency. Former Congressman Bob Goodlatte and Matthew Silver launched two separate op-eds attacking me and Michael Ellis by name over FBI searches of Section 702 of FISA data. They think such searches should require probable cause and a warrant if the subject of the search is an American. Michael and I think that's a stale idea but one that won't stop real abuses but will hurt national security. We'll be challenging Goodlatte and Silver to a debate, but in the meantime, watch for our rebuttal, hopefully on the same RealClearPolitics site where the attack was published. No one ever said that industrial policy was easy, Jeffery tells us. And the release of a new Huawei phone with impressive specs is leading some observers to insist that U.S. controls on chip and AI technology are already failing. Meanwhile, the effort to rebuild U.S. chip manufacturing is also faltering as Taiwan Semiconductor finds that Japan is more competitive than the U.S.. Can the “Sacramento effect” compete with the Brussels effect by imposing California's notion of good regulation on the world? Jim reports that California's new privacy agency is making a good run at setting cybersecurity standards for everyone else. Jeffery explains how the DELETE Act could transform (or kill) the personal data brokering business, a result that won't necessarily protect your privacy but probably will reduce the number of companies exploiting that data.  A Democratic candidate for a hotly contested Virginia legislative seat has been raising as much as $600 thousand by having sex with her husband on the internet for tips. Susanna Gibson, though, is not backing down. She says that it's a sex crime, or maybe revenge porn, for opposition researchers to criticize her creative approach to campaign funding.  Finally, in quick hits: Jeffery and I debate when the product of AI prompts should be granted registered copyright protection. I question whether Lyft's new program allowing passengers to specify the gender of their drivers will survive litigation. And Jeffery and I note that the Supreme Court has at least briefly stayed the Fifth Circuit's ruling on the Administration's effort to “persuade” social media to suppress the speech of a large chunk of the country. Download 472nd Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

That's the question I have after the latest episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast. Jeffery Atik lays out the government's best case: that it artificially bolstered its dominance in search by paying to be the default search engine everywhere. That's not exactly an unassailable case, at least in my view, and the government doesn't inspire confidence when it starts out of the box by suggesting it lacks evidence because Google did such a good job of suppressing “bad” internal corporate messages. Plus, if paying for defaults is bad, what's the remedy–not paying for them? Assigning default search engines at random? That would set trust-busting back a generation with consumers.  There are still lots of turns to the litigation, but the Justice Department has some work to do. The other big story of the week was the opening of Schumer University on the Hill, with closed-door Socratic tutorials on AI policy issues for legislators. Sultan Meghji suspects that, for all the kumbaya moments, agreement on a legislative solution will be hard to come by. Jim Dempsey sees more opportunity for agreement, although he too is not optimistic that anything will pass, pointing to the odd-couple proposal by Senators Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) for a framework that denies 230-style immunity and requires registration and audits of AI models overseen by a new agency. Former Congressman Bob Goodlatte and Matthew Silver launched two separate op-eds attacking me and Michael Ellis by name over FBI searches of Section 702 of FISA data. They think such searches should require probable cause and a warrant if the subject of the search is an American. Michael and I think that's a stale idea but one that won't stop real abuses but will hurt national security. We'll be challenging Goodlatte and Silver to a debate, but in the meantime, watch for our rebuttal, hopefully on the same RealClearPolitics site where the attack was published. No one ever said that industrial policy was easy, Jeffery tells us. And the release of a new Huawei phone with impressive specs is leading some observers to insist that U.S. controls on chip and AI technology are already failing. Meanwhile, the effort to rebuild U.S. chip manufacturing is also faltering as Taiwan Semiconductor finds that Japan is more competitive than the U.S.. Can the “Sacramento effect” compete with the Brussels effect by imposing California's notion of good regulation on the world? Jim reports that California's new privacy agency is making a good run at setting cybersecurity standards for everyone else. Jeffery explains how the DELETE Act could transform (or kill) the personal data brokering business, a result that won't necessarily protect your privacy but probably will reduce the number of companies exploiting that data.  A Democratic candidate for a hotly contested Virginia legislative seat has been raising as much as $600 thousand by having sex with her husband on the internet for tips. Susanna Gibson, though, is not backing down. She says that it's a sex crime, or maybe revenge porn, for opposition researchers to criticize her creative approach to campaign funding.  Finally, in quick hits: Jeffery and I debate when the product of AI prompts should be granted registered copyright protection. I question whether Lyft's new program allowing passengers to specify the gender of their drivers will survive litigation. And Jeffery and I note that the Supreme Court has at least briefly stayed the Fifth Circuit's ruling on the Administration's effort to “persuade” social media to suppress the speech of a large chunk of the country. Download 472nd Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

How do we think about the business cycle in a world of abundance? Investment and finance expert, Jordi Visser, president and CIO of Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers, welcomes tech visionary, Sultan Meghji, CEO and co-founder of Frontier Foundry, to discuss whether talk of recession and inflation will soon be markers of a bygone era. According to Sultan, AI and emerging exponential technologies such as fusion, protein folding, and LK99 have transformative properties that will change the way the global economy — and human life — functions. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's surely fitting that a decision released on July 4 would set off fireworks on the Cyberlaw Podcast. The source of the drama was U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty's injunction prohibiting multiple federal agencies from leaning on social media platforms to suppress speech the agencies don't like. Megan Stifel, Paul Rosenzweig, and I could not disagree more about the decision, which seems quite justified to me, given the aggressive White House communications telling the platforms whose speech the government wanted suppressed. Paul and Megan argue that it's not censorship, that the judge got standing law wrong, and that I ought to invite a few content moderation aficionados on for a full hour episode on the topic.   That all comes after a much less lively review of recent stories on artificial intelligence. Sultan Meghji downplays OpenAI's claim that they've taken a step forward in preventing the emergence of a “misaligned”—in other words evil—superintelligence. We note what may be the first real-life “liar's dividend” from deep faked voice. Even more interesting is the prospect that large language models will end up poisoning themselves by consuming their own waste—that is, by being trained on recent internet discourse that includes large volumes of text created by earlier models. That might stall progress in AI, Sultan suggests. But not, I predict before government regulation tries to do the same; as witness, New York City's law requiring companies that use AI in hiring to disclose all the evidence needed to sue them for discrimination. Also vying to load large language models with rent-seeking demands are Big Content lawyers. Sultan and I try to separate the few legitimate intellectual property claims against AI from the many bogus ones.  I channel a recent New York gubernatorial candidate in opining that the rent-seeking is too damn high.  Paul dissects China's most recent and self-defeating effort to deter the West from decoupling from Chinese supply chains. It looks as though China was so eager to punish the West that it rolled out supply chain penalties before it had the leverage to make the punishment stick. Speaking of self-defeating Chinese government policies, it looks as though the government's two-minute hate directed at China's fintech giants is coming to an end. Sultan walks us through the wreckage of the American cryptocurrency industry, pausing to note the executive exodus from Binance and the end of the view that cryptocurrency could be squared with U.S. regulatory authorities. Not in this administration, and maybe not in any, and outcome that will delay financial modernization here for years. I renew my promise to get Gus Coldebella on the podcast to see if he can turn the tide of negativism.  In quick hits and updates: There's an effort afoot to amend the National Defense Authorization Act  to prevent American government agencies, and only American government agencies, from buying data available to everyone else. We are skeptical that it will pass.  The EU and the U.S. have reached a (third) transatlantic data transfer deal, and just in time for Meta, which was facing a new set of competition attacks on its data protection compliance. And Canada, which already looks ineffectual for passing a link tax that led Facebook and Google to simply drop links to Canadian media, now looks ineffectual and petty, announcing it has pulled its paltry advertising budget from Facebook. Oh, and last year's social media villain is this year's social media hero, at least on the left, as Meta launches Threads and threatens Twitter's hopes for a recovery. Download 467th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

It's surely fitting that a decision released on July 4 would set off fireworks on the Cyberlaw Podcast. The source of the drama was U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty's injunction prohibiting multiple federal agencies from leaning on social media platforms to suppress speech the agencies don't like. Megan Stifel, Paul Rosenzweig, and I could not disagree more about the decision, which seems quite justified to me, given the aggressive White House communications telling the platforms whose speech the government wanted suppressed. Paul and Megan argue that it's not censorship, that the judge got standing law wrong, and that I ought to invite a few content moderation aficionados on for a full hour episode on the topic.   That all comes after a much less lively review of recent stories on artificial intelligence. Sultan Meghji downplays OpenAI's claim that they've taken a step forward in preventing the emergence of a “misaligned”—in other words evil—superintelligence. We note what may be the first real-life “liar's dividend” from deep faked voice. Even more interesting is the prospect that large language models will end up poisoning themselves by consuming their own waste—that is, by being trained on recent internet discourse that includes large volumes of text created by earlier models. That might stall progress in AI, Sultan suggests. But not, I predict before government regulation tries to do the same; as witness, New York City's law requiring companies that use AI in hiring to disclose all the evidence needed to sue them for discrimination. Also vying to load large language models with rent-seeking demands are Big Content lawyers. Sultan and I try to separate the few legitimate intellectual property claims against AI from the many bogus ones.  I channel a recent New York gubernatorial candidate in opining that the rent-seeking is too damn high.  Paul dissects China's most recent and self-defeating effort to deter the West from decoupling from Chinese supply chains. It looks as though China was so eager to punish the West that it rolled out supply chain penalties before it had the leverage to make the punishment stick. Speaking of self-defeating Chinese government policies, it looks as though the government's two-minute hate directed at China's fintech giants is coming to an end. Sultan walks us through the wreckage of the American cryptocurrency industry, pausing to note the executive exodus from Binance and the end of the view that cryptocurrency could be squared with U.S. regulatory authorities. Not in this administration, and maybe not in any, and outcome that will delay financial modernization here for years. I renew my promise to get Gus Coldebella on the podcast to see if he can turn the tide of negativism.  In quick hits and updates: There's an effort afoot to amend the National Defense Authorization Act  to prevent American government agencies, and only American government agencies, from buying data available to everyone else. We are skeptical that it will pass.  The EU and the U.S. have reached a (third) transatlantic data transfer deal, and just in time for Meta, which was facing a new set of competition attacks on its data protection compliance. And Canada, which already looks ineffectual for passing a link tax that led Facebook and Google to simply drop links to Canadian media, now looks ineffectual and petty, announcing it has pulled its paltry advertising budget from Facebook. Oh, and last year's social media villain is this year's social media hero, at least on the left, as Meta launches Threads and threatens Twitter's hopes for a recovery. Download 467th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

G3 and Jordi Visser welcome back Sultan Meghji, a good friend of the firm and all-around technology expert, to talk about AI and its explosion into the public's consciousness.What does AI's acceleration mean for the markets in general and energy prices in particular? How close are we to reaching the so-called Singularity? This episode covers all of this and more. Please check important disclosures at the end of the episode.Time Stamps:Are we in an AI hype cycle or is the accelerated pace of innovation the culmination of decades of work? [4:59]How is AI enthusiasm impacting the financial markets including mega cap technology companies such as NVIDIA? [9:00]What is the difference between Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and AI, and how close are we to reaching ‘The Singularity'? [15:48]What impact is AI having on energy prices? [24:49]What is the purpose behind the AI-based project that Sultan and Jordi are working on together? [37:33]Resources:Sultan's websiteAsk Jordi a Question Arena X Labs lets you train AI charactersSingularity explained in simple termsAI may be on its way to the doctor's officeMore CowbellDisclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Any health-related information shared on the podcast is not intended as medical advice or for use in self-diagnosis or treatment. Please consult a qualified healthcare professional before acting upon any health-related information on the podcast. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to review related disclosures and learn more

This episode features part 1 of our two-part interview with Paul Stephan, author of The World Crisis and International Law—a deeper and more entertaining read than the title suggests. Paul lays out the long historical arc that links the 1980s to the present day. It's not a pretty picture, and it gets worse as he ties those changes to the demands of the Knowledge Economy. How will these profound political and economic clashes resolve themselves?  We'll cover that in part 2. Meanwhile, in this episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast I tweak Sam Altman for his relentless embrace of regulation for his industry during testimony last week in the Senate.  I compare him to another Sam with a similar regulation-embracing approach to Washington, but Chinny Sharma thinks it's more accurate to say he did the opposite of everything Mark Zuckerberg did in past testimony. Chinny and Sultan Meghji unpack some of Altman's proposals, from a new government agency to license large AI models, to safety standards and audit. I mock Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., for panicking that “Europe is ahead of us” in industry-killing regulation. That earns him immortality in the form of a new Cybertoon, left. Speaking of Cybertoonz, I note that an earlier Cybertoon scooped a prominent Wall Street Journal article covering bias in AI models was scooped – by two weeks.  Paul explains the Supreme Court's ruling on social media liability for assisting ISIS, and why it didn't tell us anything of significance about section 230.  Chinny and I analyze reports that the FBI misused its access to a section 702 database.  All of the access mistakes came before the latest round of procedural reforms, but on reflection, I think the fault lies with the Justice Department and the Director of National Intelligence, who came up with access rules that all but guarantee mistakes and don't ensure that the database will be searched when security requires it.  Chinny reviews a bunch of privacy scandal wannabe stories The UK flap over efforts to create a modern version of pen/trap records. Two surveillance camera stories,  one that documents the use of surveillance cameras and facial recognition used to monitor public housing residents. In a rare moment of “check your privilege” one-upsmanship, I chide Chinny for not honoring the needs of public housing residents who value security from crime above their privacy in the laundry room, and another on the more or less inevitable networking of cheap surveillance cameras in the suburbs And finally, a government privacy scandal ripped from the headlines of the 1920s: It turns out that the U.S. Post Office can keep track of what's on the outside of the envelopes it delivers. Download the 458th Episode (mp3)  You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

This episode features part 1 of our two-part interview with Paul Stephan, author of The World Crisis and International Law—a deeper and more entertaining read than the title suggests. Paul lays out the long historical arc that links the 1980s to the present day. It's not a pretty picture, and it gets worse as he ties those changes to the demands of the Knowledge Economy. How will these profound political and economic clashes resolve themselves?  We'll cover that in part 2. Meanwhile, in this episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast I tweak Sam Altman for his relentless embrace of regulation for his industry during testimony last week in the Senate.  I compare him to another Sam with a similar regulation-embracing approach to Washington, but Chinny Sharma thinks it's more accurate to say he did the opposite of everything Mark Zuckerberg did in past testimony. Chinny and Sultan Meghji unpack some of Altman's proposals, from a new government agency to license large AI models, to safety standards and audit. I mock Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., for panicking that “Europe is ahead of us” in industry-killing regulation. That earns him immortality in the form of a new Cybertoon, left. Speaking of Cybertoonz, I note that an earlier Cybertoon scooped a prominent Wall Street Journal article covering bias in AI models was scooped – by two weeks.  Paul explains the Supreme Court's ruling on social media liability for assisting ISIS, and why it didn't tell us anything of significance about section 230.  Chinny and I analyze reports that the FBI misused its access to a section 702 database.  All of the access mistakes came before the latest round of procedural reforms, but on reflection, I think the fault lies with the Justice Department and the Director of National Intelligence, who came up with access rules that all but guarantee mistakes and don't ensure that the database will be searched when security requires it.  Chinny reviews a bunch of privacy scandal wannabe stories The UK flap over efforts to create a modern version of pen/trap records. Two surveillance camera stories,  one that documents the use of surveillance cameras and facial recognition used to monitor public housing residents. In a rare moment of “check your privilege” one-upsmanship, I chide Chinny for not honoring the needs of public housing residents who value security from crime above their privacy in the laundry room, and another on the more or less inevitable networking of cheap surveillance cameras in the suburbs And finally, a government privacy scandal ripped from the headlines of the 1920s: It turns out that the U.S. Post Office can keep track of what's on the outside of the envelopes it delivers. Download the 458th Episode (mp3)  You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

If a bank has to make a statement about its safety and soundness, that's usually a bad sign. Sultan Meghji is the former Chief Innovation Officer of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and a professor at  the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University. Ricky Mulvey caught up with Meghji to discuss: - Where Silicon Valley Bank and the FDIC faltered in the lead-up to the bank run - Ripple effects from the recent bank runs that investors should consider - Hindenburg's report on Block - How to pack a "go bag" for your savings Companies mentioned: JPM, SIVBQ, FRC, FIZN, SQ, SBUX, ORCL Host: Ricky Mulvey Guest: Sultan Meghji Engineer: Tim Sparks

GPT-4's rapid and tangible improvement over ChatGPT has more or less guaranteed that it or a competitor will be built into most new and legacy information and technology (IT) products. Some applications will be pointless; but some will change users' world. In this episode, Sultan Meghji, Jordan Schneider, and Siobhan Gorman explore the likely impact of GPT4 from Silicon Valley to China.   Kurt Sanger joins us to explain why Ukraine's IT Army of volunteer hackers creates political, legal, and maybe even physical risks for the hackers and for Ukraine. This may explain why Ukraine is looking for ways to “regularize” their international supporters, with a view to steering them toward defending Ukrainian infrastructure. Siobhan and I dig into the Biden administration's latest target for cybersecurity regulation: cloud providers.  I wonder if there is not a bit of bait and switch in operation here. The administration seems at least as intent on regulating cloud providers to catch hackers as to improve defenses. Say this for China – it never lets a bit of leverage go to waste, even when it should.  To further buttress its seven-dashed-line claim to the South China Sea, China is demanding that companies get Chinese licenses to lay submarine cable within the contested territory. That, of course, incentivizes the laying of cables much further from China, out where they're harder for the Chinese to deal with in a conflict. But some Beijing bureaucrat will no doubt claim it as a win for the wolf warriors. Ditto for the Chinese ambassador's statement about the Netherlands joining the U.S. in restricting chip-making equipment sales to China, which boiled down to “We will make you pay for that. We just do not know how yet.” The U.S. is not always good at dealing with its companies and other countries, but it is nice to be competing with a country that is demonstrably worse at it. The Security and Exchange Commission has gone from catatonic to hyperactive on cybersecurity. Siobhan notes its latest 48-hour incident reporting requirement and the difficulty of reporting anything useful in that time frame.  Kurt and Siobhan bring their expertise as parents of teens and aspiring teens to the TikTok debate. I linger over the extraordinary and undercovered mess created by “18F”—the General Service Administration's effort to bring Silicon Valley to the government's IT infrastructure. It looks like they brought Silicon Valley's arrogance, its political correctness, and its penchant for breaking things but forgot to bring either competence or honesty.  18F lied to its federal customers about how or whether it was checking the identities of people logging in through login.gov. When it finally admitted the lie, it brazenly claimed it was not checking because the technology was biased, contrary to the only available evidence. Oh, and it refused to give back the $10 million it charged because the work it did cost more than that. This breakdown in the middle of coronavirus handouts undoubtedly juiced fraud, but no one has figured out how much. Among the victims: Sen. Ron Wyden (D.-Ore.), who used login.gov and its phony biometric checks as the “good” alternative that would let the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) cancel its politically inconvenient contract with ID.me. Really, guys, it's time to start scrubbing 18F from your LinkedIn profiles. The Knicks have won some games. Blind pigs have found some acorns. But Madison Square Garden (and Knicks) owner, Jimmy Dolan is still investing good money in his unwinnable fight to use facial recognition to keep lawyers he does not like out of the Garden. Kurt offers commentary, thereby saving himself the cost of Knicks tickets for future playoff games.  Finally, I read Simson Garfinkel's explanation of a question I asked (and should have known the answer to) in episode 448.

GPT-4's rapid and tangible improvement over ChatGPT has more or less guaranteed that it or a competitor will be built into most new and legacy information and technology (IT) products. Some applications will be pointless; but some will change users' world. In this episode, Sultan Meghji, Jordan Schneider, and Siobhan Gorman explore the likely impact of GPT4 from Silicon Valley to China.   Kurt Sanger joins us to explain why Ukraine's IT Army of volunteer hackers creates political, legal, and maybe even physical risks for the hackers and for Ukraine. This may explain why Ukraine is looking for ways to “regularize” their international supporters, with a view to steering them toward defending Ukrainian infrastructure. Siobhan and I dig into the Biden administration's latest target for cybersecurity regulation: cloud providers.  I wonder if there is not a bit of bait and switch in operation here. The administration seems at least as intent on regulating cloud providers to catch hackers as to improve defenses. Say this for China – it never lets a bit of leverage go to waste, even when it should.  To further buttress its seven-dashed-line claim to the South China Sea, China is demanding that companies get Chinese licenses to lay submarine cable within the contested territory. That, of course, incentivizes the laying of cables much further from China, out where they're harder for the Chinese to deal with in a conflict. But some Beijing bureaucrat will no doubt claim it as a win for the wolf warriors. Ditto for the Chinese ambassador's statement about the Netherlands joining the U.S. in restricting chip-making equipment sales to China, which boiled down to “We will make you pay for that. We just do not know how yet.” The U.S. is not always good at dealing with its companies and other countries, but it is nice to be competing with a country that is demonstrably worse at it. The Security and Exchange Commission has gone from catatonic to hyperactive on cybersecurity. Siobhan notes its latest 48-hour incident reporting requirement and the difficulty of reporting anything useful in that time frame.  Kurt and Siobhan bring their expertise as parents of teens and aspiring teens to the TikTok debate. I linger over the extraordinary and undercovered mess created by “18F”—the General Service Administration's effort to bring Silicon Valley to the government's IT infrastructure. It looks like they brought Silicon Valley's arrogance, its political correctness, and its penchant for breaking things but forgot to bring either competence or honesty.  18F lied to its federal customers about how or whether it was checking the identities of people logging in through login.gov. When it finally admitted the lie, it brazenly claimed it was not checking because the technology was biased, contrary to the only available evidence. Oh, and it refused to give back the $10 million it charged because the work it did cost more than that. This breakdown in the middle of coronavirus handouts undoubtedly juiced fraud, but no one has figured out how much. Among the victims: Sen. Ron Wyden (D.-Ore.), who used login.gov and its phony biometric checks as the “good” alternative that would let the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) cancel its politically inconvenient contract with ID.me. Really, guys, it's time to start scrubbing 18F from your LinkedIn profiles. The Knicks have won some games. Blind pigs have found some acorns. But Madison Square Garden (and Knicks) owner, Jimmy Dolan is still investing good money in his unwinnable fight to use facial recognition to keep lawyers he does not like out of the Garden. Kurt offers commentary, thereby saving himself the cost of Knicks tickets for future playoff games.  Finally, I read Simson Garfinkel's explanation of a question I asked (and should have known the answer to) in episode 448.

Is the banking system in America collapsing? The recent closure of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, combined with the loss of confidence and sale of Credit Suisse has sent shockwaves through the global financial system. Fran Racioppi brings back Episode 91 guest and former Chief Innovation Officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Sultan Meghji, to answer the questions we are all asking: why are banks failing? Should we be concerned about our money? Are taxpayers footing the bill? When should we worry? Learn more about Sultan Meghji on LinkedIn and Twitter @sultanmeghji.Check out The Jedburgh Podcast Website. Subscribe to us and follow @jedburghpodcast on all social media. Watch the full video version on YouTube.Highlights:-0:00 Welcome back to The Jedburgh Podcast -1:51 Don't worry about your checking account-4:26 The banking crisis interest rates explained-6:37 Mortgage backed securities and the changes since the 2008 financial crisis-8:14 The failure at Credit Suisse-9:48 The role of the FDIC-14:10 Are taxpayers footing the bill?-15:32 What will cause a run on the banking system?-17:45 Why Sultan only fears defaulting on the debt ceilingQuotes:-”Don't worry about your checking account….Don't stress about it. It doesn't matter if it has $1 in it or a billion dollars in it.” (2:02)-”Having the single largest increase in federal reserve interest rates in human history has caused a tremendous imbalance in a subset of the banks in the United States.” (3:15)-”We don't have a banking crisis. We have a psychological issue right now.” (3:43) -”You can trace the balance sheet problems for Silicon Valley Bank directly back to the increase in Federal Reserve interest rate hikes.” (6:27)-”When the US Government took it over, it just took them a few days to reboot the computer.” (11:42)-”You should have money in one of the big systemically important banks. You should have money in a credit union. And you should have money in a midsize regional or community bank.” (12:57)-”Literally the only thing that I would ever worry about…is if somehow the US defaulted on the debt ceiling.” (17:45)This episode is brought to you by Jersey Mike's, Compass Workforce Solutions, 18A Fitness

Ryan Gorman hosts an iHeartRadio nationwide special featuring Sultan Meghji, former Chief Innovation Officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation & Duke University Professor. Sultan Meghji breaks down the U.S. banking and financial systems following the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, including the role of the Federal Reserve and the FDIC.

President Biden addressed the nation this morning to emphasize the banking system is "safe" following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank -- the second-largest bank failure in US history. Biden outlined a number of steps his administration is taking to address the issue. But the big question remains: How did this happen? Sultan Meghji, the former chief innovation officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, joins the show to discuss. To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

In the 7a hour, NewsRadio WFLA Anchor Chris Trenkmann runs through today's top stories, including how red tide's effects impact Spring Break across the Tampa Bay area. Former Chief Innovation Officer at the FDIC, Sultan Meghji, breaks down the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the concern that more banks may fail. Gov. DeSantis was promoting his book in Iowa and received a "snowflake" gift with the word fascist secretly spelled out on it. ABC News Entertainment Correspondent Jason Nathanson joins the show to recap the Oscars. Airlines are making an insane $5.3 billion annually from baggage fees. A Riverview teacher has been accused of having sex with a student during after-school activities.

Sultan Meghji and Jordi Visser continue their discussion about the convergence of AI and longevity, and the resulting implications.In Part 2 of the discussion with AI expert Sultan Meghij, G3 and Jordi continue to explore the intersection of AI and longevity. The topics of discussion include mushrooms, the intersection of web3 and longevity, “DeSci” (a.k.a. Decentralized Science), and the beneficiaries of the convergence of AI and health.Please check important disclosures at the end of this episode.Time Stamps:At the DNA level, how closely related are mushrooms and humans? [:48]Is there a way in which longevity and crypto/Web3 converge? [6:08]Why is Professor “Maddog” Hall relevant to the concept of DeSci? [12:50]What investment themes will emanate from the convergence of AI and health? [16:04]Who benefits from this convergence? [20:54]Resources:Sultan Meghji's bioSultan's SubstackHow are mushrooms more similar to humans than plants?Bio for Paul Stamets, mycologistOperation Choke PointA guide to DeSciProfessor Jon “Maddog” HallDisclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Any health-related information shared on the podcast is not intended as medical advice or for use in self-diagnosis or treatment. Please consult a qualified healthcare professional before acting upon any health-related information on the podcast. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to review related disclosures and learn more about Weiss.

Sultan Meghji and Jordi Visser discuss how artificial intelligence enhances our ability to roll back our biological clocks through health management protocols.In this week's Green Marbles, G3 and Jordi welcome their mutual friend, Sultan Meghji, back to the show.Last October, Sultan appeared on the show to discuss China, financial innovation, and cybersecurity. This time, he was invited back to discuss health, longevity, and artificial intelligence. As an AI expert with decades of technology experience, Sultan brings a unique perspective to health topics.Please note that this discussion is significantly longer than our usual show length. As such, we have broken up this discussion into two parts. We hope you enjoy Part 1 now. Please be on the lookout for Part 2, which will drop during the week of February 20th. Time Stamps:Why don't more people tend to their health? [2:34]What health management protocols do Jordi and Sultan adhere to? [12:01]In what ways does the vagus nerve assist in managing overall health? [24:32]Is AI going to replace doctors or make doctors better? [32:04]Is there a practical example of how AI has already impacted lives? [45:58]Will AI become a bigger part of how we find disease? [48:07]What is the difference between chronological and biological age? [49:24]Resources:Sultan Meghji's bioSultan's SubstackSultan's tweet about “Biological Debt”Website for Terry WahlsJosh Waitzkin on HRVWhat is the Vagus Nerve?Dr. Leah LagosLimitless with Chris HemsworthBreathe Flow appHouse, a TV show about a maverick doctorGalleri early cancer detection systemDisclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is...

Tech seems to drive our lives these days. We can't do anything without some sort of device in our hand, at our fingertips, and even on our faces. But what does the tech industry actually do? Fran Racioppi asks Sultan Meghji for his opinion on all things tech. Sultan was the first Chief Innovation Officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, he's a Scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a Fellow at the George Mason National Security Institute, a Member of the Bretton Woods Committee, and currently a Professor in the graduate programs at Duke University's Pratt Engineering School teaching AI, Web3 & Cybersecurity.They cover how FINTECH changed the banking industry and why Sultan's four innovation themes of Inclusion, Resilience, Amplification and Future are critical to implementing sustainable technology solutions in any business. Plus they cover how technology is being used in America's peer-to-peer competition with China. Learn more about him on LinkedIn and Twitter @sultanmeghji.Read the full episode transcription here and learn more on The Jedburgh Podcast Website. Subscribe to us and follow @jedburghpodcast on all social media. Watch the full video version on YouTube.Highlights:0:00 Welcome to Washington, DC5:00 What is tech and the technology revolution10:19 Leading technology at FDIC21:51 How FINTECH has advanced the banking industry27:53 Sultan's Four Innovation Themes: #1 Inclusion30:38 #2 Resilience35:13 #3 Amplification37:32 #4 Future40:27 How technology will enable competition with China 56:11 The status of cybersecurity in America1:01:07 Banking competition1:04:53 The next big tech innovation1:06:49 Three FoundationsQuotes: “We use tech and technology as a placeholder relative to how the caveman first had tools.” (5:24) “I fundamentally believe that humans plus technology are a different species than humans without technology.” (5:49)“We've started removing people from the processes of our civilization.” (5:32)“Starbucks would be a multi-hundred billion dollar bank if you just thought about the app as a bank.” (13:06)“Anybody who says they can predict the future has no idea what they're doing.” (37:36)“I want the United States to continue to be the backbone of the global financial system.” (39:10)“By the time we get to 2040-2050, all the telecommunications infrastructure globally will be Chinese.” (45:08)“It's always in cyber going to be easier to be an offensive actor than a defensive actor.” (58:11)Sultan's Three Daily Foundations to Success:Get really good sleepLearn something new and meaningfulDo something to get tiredThis episode is brought to you by Jersey Mike's, 18A Fitness & Compass Workforce Solutions

In this interview, I sit down with Sultan Meghji, a seasoned entrepreneur and former Chief Innovation Officer at the FDIC. Sultan was the FDIC's first ever Chief Innovation Officer and ended up leaving the position and penning an op ed in Bloomberg titled: Why I Quit as FDIC Innovation Chief: Technophobia. I talk with Sultan about the blockers he ran into at the FDIC and what he witnessed as the agency continuously jury-rigged 20th-century rules to cover 21st-century technology. Get an inside look into Sultan's journey from his background in finance to his innovative work at the FDIC, and gain valuable insights into his thoughts on the future of innovation, crypto, and global leadership in the financial sector. Why I Quit as FDIC Innovation Chief: Technophobia: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-02-22/i-quit-as-fdic-innovation-chief-because-of-regulators-technophobia #FDIC #Fintech #innovation —

This episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast is dominated by stories about possible cybersecurity regulation. David Kris points us first to an article by the leadership of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Administration in Foreign Affairs. Jen Easterly and Eric Goldstein seem to take a tough line on “Why Companies Must Build Safety Into Tech Products.“ But for all the tough language, one word, “regulation,” is entirely missing from the piece. Meanwhile, the cybersecurity strategy that the White House has been reportedly drafting for months seems to be hung up over how enthusiastically to demand regulation. All of which seems just a little weird in a world where Republicans hold the House. Regulation is not likely to be high on the GOP to-do list, so calls for tougher regulation are almost certainly more symbolic than real. Still, this is a week for symbolic calls for regulation. David also takes us through an National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) report on the anticompetitive impact of Apple's and Google's control of their mobile app markets. The report points to many problems and opportunities for abuse inherent in their headlock on what apps can be sold to phone users. But, as Google and Apple are quick to point out, they do play a role in regulating app security, so breaking the headlock could be bad for cybersecurity. In any event, practically every recommendation for action in the report is a call for Congress to step in—almost certainly a nonstarter for reasons already given. Not to be outdone on the phony regulation beat, Jordan Schneider and Sultan Meghji explore some of the policy and regulatory proposals for AI that have been inspired by the success of ChatGPT. The EU's AI Act is coming in for lots of attention, mainly from parts of the industry that want to be regulation-free. Sultan and I trade observations about who'll be hollowed out first by ChatGPT, law firms or investment firms. Sultan also tells us why the ION ransomware hack matters. Jordan and Sultan find a cybersecurity angle to The Great Chinese Balloon Scandal of 2023. And I offer an assessment of Matt Taibbi's story about the Hamilton 68 “Russian influence” reports. If you have wondered what the fuss was about, do not expect mainstream media to tell you; the media does not come out looking good in this story. Unfortunately for Matt Taibbi, he does not look much better than the reporters his story criticizes. David thinks it is a balanced and moderate take, for which I offer an apology and a promise to do better next time.

This episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast is dominated by stories about possible cybersecurity regulation. David Kris points us first to an article by the leadership of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Administration in Foreign Affairs. Jen Easterly and Eric Goldstein seem to take a tough line on “Why Companies Must Build Safety Into Tech Products.“ But for all the tough language, one word, “regulation,” is entirely missing from the piece. Meanwhile, the cybersecurity strategy that the White House has been reportedly drafting for months seems to be hung up over how enthusiastically to demand regulation. All of which seems just a little weird in a world where Republicans hold the House. Regulation is not likely to be high on the GOP to-do list, so calls for tougher regulation are almost certainly more symbolic than real. Still, this is a week for symbolic calls for regulation. David also takes us through an National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) report on the anticompetitive impact of Apple's and Google's control of their mobile app markets. The report points to many problems and opportunities for abuse inherent in their headlock on what apps can be sold to phone users. But, as Google and Apple are quick to point out, they do play a role in regulating app security, so breaking the headlock could be bad for cybersecurity. In any event, practically every recommendation for action in the report is a call for Congress to step in—almost certainly a nonstarter for reasons already given. Not to be outdone on the phony regulation beat, Jordan Schneider and Sultan Meghji explore some of the policy and regulatory proposals for AI that have been inspired by the success of ChatGPT. The EU's AI Act is coming in for lots of attention, mainly from parts of the industry that want to be regulation-free. Sultan and I trade observations about who'll be hollowed out first by ChatGPT, law firms or investment firms. Sultan also tells us why the ION ransomware hack matters. Jordan and Sultan find a cybersecurity angle to The Great Chinese Balloon Scandal of 2023. And I offer an assessment of Matt Taibbi's story about the Hamilton 68 “Russian influence” reports. If you have wondered what the fuss was about, do not expect mainstream media to tell you; the media does not come out looking good in this story. Unfortunately for Matt Taibbi, he does not look much better than the reporters his story criticizes. David thinks it is a balanced and moderate take, for which I offer an apology and a promise to do better next time.

The war that began with the Russian invasion of Ukraine grinds on. Cybersecurity experts have spent much of 2022 trying to draw lessons about cyberwar strategies from the conflict. Dmitri Alperovitch takes us through the latest lessons, cautioning that all of them could look different in a few months, as both sides adapt to the others' actions.  David Kris joins Dmitri to evaluate a Microsoft report hinting that China may be abusing its recent edict requiring that software vulnerabilities be reported first to the Chinese government. The temptation to turn such reports into zero-day exploits may be irresistible, and Microsoft notes with suspicion a recent rise in Chinese zero-day exploits. Dmitri worried about just such a development while serving on the Cyber Safety Review Board, but he is not yet convinced that we have the evidence to prove the case against the Chinese mandatory disclosure law.  Sultan Meghji keeps us in Redmond, digging through a deep Protocol story on how Microsoft has helped build Artificial Intelligence (AI) in China. The amount of money invested, and the deep bench of AI researchers from China, raises real questions about how the United States can decouple from China—and whether China may eventually decide to do the decoupling.  I express skepticism about the White House's latest initiative on ransomware, a 30-plus nation summit that produced a modest set of concrete agreements. But Sultan and Dmitri have been on the receiving end of deputy national security adviser Anne Neuberger's forceful personality, and they think we will see results. We'd better. Baks reported that ransomware payments doubled last year, to $1.2 billion.   David introduces the high-stakes struggle over when cyberattacks can be excluded from insurance coverage as acts of war. A recent settlement between Mondelez and Zurich has left the law in limbo.  Sultan tells me why AI is so bad at explaining the results it reaches. He sees light at the end of the tunnel. I see more stealthy imposition of woke academic values. But we find common ground in trashing the Facial Recognition Act, a lefty Democrat bill that throws together every bad proposal to regulate facial recognition ever put forward and adds a few more. A red wave will be worth it just to make sure this bill stays dead. Finally, Sultan reviews the National Security Agency's report on supply chain security. And I introduce the elephant in the room, or at least the mastodon: Elon Musk's takeover at Twitter and the reaction to it. I downplay the probability of CFIUS reviewing the deal. And I mock the Elon-haters who fear that scrimping on content moderation will turn Twitter into a hellhole that includes *gasp!* Republican speech. Turns out that they are fleeing Twitter for Mastodon, which pretty much invented scrimping on content moderation.

The war that began with the Russian invasion of Ukraine grinds on. Cybersecurity experts have spent much of 2022 trying to draw lessons about cyberwar strategies from the conflict. Dmitri Alperovitch takes us through the latest lessons, cautioning that all of them could look different in a few months, as both sides adapt to the others' actions.  David Kris joins Dmitri to evaluate a Microsoft report hinting that China may be abusing its recent edict requiring that software vulnerabilities be reported first to the Chinese government. The temptation to turn such reports into zero-day exploits may be irresistible, and Microsoft notes with suspicion a recent rise in Chinese zero-day exploits. Dmitri worried about just such a development while serving on the Cyber Safety Review Board, but he is not yet convinced that we have the evidence to prove the case against the Chinese mandatory disclosure law.  Sultan Meghji keeps us in Redmond, digging through a deep Protocol story on how Microsoft has helped build Artificial Intelligence (AI) in China. The amount of money invested, and the deep bench of AI researchers from China, raises real questions about how the United States can decouple from China—and whether China may eventually decide to do the decoupling.  I express skepticism about the White House's latest initiative on ransomware, a 30-plus nation summit that produced a modest set of concrete agreements. But Sultan and Dmitri have been on the receiving end of deputy national security adviser Anne Neuberger's forceful personality, and they think we will see results. We'd better. Baks reported that ransomware payments doubled last year, to $1.2 billion.   David introduces the high-stakes struggle over when cyberattacks can be excluded from insurance coverage as acts of war. A recent settlement between Mondelez and Zurich has left the law in limbo.  Sultan tells me why AI is so bad at explaining the results it reaches. He sees light at the end of the tunnel. I see more stealthy imposition of woke academic values. But we find common ground in trashing the Facial Recognition Act, a lefty Democrat bill that throws together every bad proposal to regulate facial recognition ever put forward and adds a few more. A red wave will be worth it just to make sure this bill stays dead. Finally, Sultan reviews the National Security Agency's report on supply chain security. And I introduce the elephant in the room, or at least the mastodon: Elon Musk's takeover at Twitter and the reaction to it. I downplay the probability of CFIUS reviewing the deal. And I mock the Elon-haters who fear that scrimping on content moderation will turn Twitter into a hellhole that includes *gasp!* Republican speech. Turns out that they are fleeing Twitter for Mastodon, which pretty much invented scrimping on content moderation.

For the first time ever, G3 and Mike Edwards welcome an outside guest to the show, Sultan Meghji. Until recently, Sultan was the Chief Innovation Officer of the FDIC and an advisor to the Biden Administration on technology policy. Sultan is currently a professor at Duke University and an advisor to Reciprocal Ventures, America's Frontier Fund, and several other companies. Sultan also serves as a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Distinguished Member of the Bretton Woods Committee, and Visiting Fellow at the National Security Institute. In the past, Sultan was an advisor to the US Government on numerous issues including AI, cybersecurity, and quantum computing. He's also been a serial entrepreneur who has founded companies that span Fintech, Life Sciences, and Information Technology. A final note: given the considerable scope of Sultan's experience, this week's episode is significantly longer than normal. We think it was worth it to break the convention and hope you do as well. Timestamps: • 10:45 what are the signals and the noise with the Russian-Ukraine situation in the near term? • 18:07 is the use of tactical nuclear weapons a possible outcome in the future? • 25:24 are markets pricing in a nuclear war in Ukraine? • 29:17 how does Iran respond when viewing Russia's nuclear leverage? • 38:05 in terms of the CHIPS Act, what are the response vectors from the PRC? • 45:48 how does immigration impact national cyber security? • 50:12 what are Mike and Sultan paying attention to on the political front? Disclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Any health-related information shared on the podcast is not intended as medical advice or for use in self-diagnosis or treatment. Please consult a qualified healthcare professional before acting upon any health-related information on the podcast. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to review related disclosures and learn more about Weiss.

Segment 1: Sultan Meghji, Former Chief Innovation Officer (CIO), Federal Deposit Insurance Corp (FDIC); Duke Professor and Scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, joins John to talk about the Fed’s rate hike, if the Fed should have acted sooner to take on inflation, the likelihood we see a recession, and when we might […]

Sultan Meghji, former Chief Innovation Officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp (FDIC), joins the show to discuss the impact of the Federal Reserve's latest interest rate hike.

This recording is from Fintech Nexus USA (formerly known as LendIt Fintech USA) held at the Javits Center in New York City on May 25-26, 2022. It is from the track: Regulation for the Next Phase of Fintech - Sponsored by Cross River Bank and is titled: How to Reinvigorate Government's Approach to Innovation. Speaking at this session is Sultan Meghji,  with Moderator: Phil Goldfeder, Cross River Bank.

The financial regulatory apparatus in this country is incredibly complex. Much of it has been patched together over the past 90 years or so and does not reflect the realities of this modern world. But what needs to change? How can government become better at regulating finance?My next guest on the Fintech One-on-One podcast is Sultan Meghji. He is the former head of innovation and the FDIC and he grappled with those issues firsthand. Now that he has left the agency he is able to talk freely about what is most needed for regulators to, not just deal with a rapidly changing financial system, but to embrace it.In this podcast you will learn:Why Sultan decided to take the job at the FDIC.The innovations he was most focused on.The programs he worked on first.When it comes to new technology, what banks need most urgently.The biggest challenge to enacting change in banking.Why banks are getting a lower percentage of money injected into the economy.How the government can attract talent and why it is such a big problem.What he highlighted in his Bloomberg op-ed.The reasons that Sultan quit after a year on the job.The reaction he received from his op-ed.If we were designing a regulatory system from scratch, what it should look like.Why we need to incentivize global capital to come to the United States.Some incremental changes that can happen to get us to a better place.Sultan's perspective on the future of financial regulation.Connect with Fintech One-on-One: Tweet me @PeterRenton Connect with me on LinkedIn Find previous Fintech One-on-One episodes

At least that's the lesson that Paul Rosenzweig and I distill from the recent 11th Circuit decision mostly striking down Florida's law regulating social media platforms' content “moderation” rules. We disagree flamboyantly on pretty much everything else—including whether the court will intervene before judgment in a pending 5th Circuit case where the appeals court stayed a district court's injunction and allowed Texas's similar law to remain in effect.   When it comes to content moderation, Silicon Valley is a lot tougher on the Libs of TikTok than the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Instagram just suspended the Libs of Tiktok account, I report, while a recent Brookings study shows that the Chinese government's narratives are polluting Google and Bing search results on a regular basis. Google News and YouTube do the worst job of keeping the party line out of searches. Both Google News and YouTube return CCP-influenced links on the first page about a quarter of the time.               I ask Sultan Meghji to shed some light on the remarkable TerraUSD cryptocurrency crash. Which leads us, not surprisingly, from massive investor losses to whether financial regulators have jurisdiction over cryptocurrency. The short answer: Whether they have jurisdiction or not, all the incentives favor an assertion of jurisdiction. Nick Weaver is with us in spirit as we flag his rip-roaring attack on the whole fiel—a don't-miss interview for readers who can't get enough of Nick.  It's a big episode for artificial intelligence (AI) news too. Matthew Heiman contrasts the different approaches to AI regulation in three big jurisdictions. China's is pretty focused, Europe's is ambitious and all-pervading, and the United States isn't ready to do anything.  Paul thinks DuckDuckGo should be DuckDuckGone after the search engine allowed Microsoft trackers to follow users of its browser.  Sultan and I explore ways of biasing AI algorithms. It turns out that saving money on datasets makes the algorithm especially sensitive to the order in which the data is presented. Debiasing with synthetic data has its own risks, Sultan avers. But if you're looking for good news, here's some: Self-driving car companies who are late to the party are likely to catch up fast, because they can build on a lot of data that's already been collected as well as new training techniques. Matthew breaks down the $150 million fine paid by Twitter for allowing ad targeting of the phone numbers its users supplied for two-factor authentication (2FA) security purposes. Finally, in quick hits: Matthew recommends that we all get popcorn for: Spain's planned investigation of its intelligence services following a phone hacking scandal. Sultan and I call time of death for the Klobuchar bill regulating Silicon Valley self-preferencing. It was the most likely of all the Silicon Valley competition bills to pass, but election year tensions and massive lobbying campaigns by industry have made its path to enactment too steep. And Sultan notes that the Commerce Department has published with relatively little change its rule restricting exports of hacking tools.     Download the 409th Episode (mp3)   You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families or pets.

At least that's the lesson that Paul Rosenzweig and I distill from the recent 11th Circuit decision mostly striking down Florida's law regulating social media platforms' content “moderation” rules. We disagree flamboyantly on pretty much everything else—including whether the court will intervene before judgment in a pending 5th Circuit case where the appeals court stayed a district court's injunction and allowed Texas's similar law to remain in effect.   When it comes to content moderation, Silicon Valley is a lot tougher on the Libs of TikTok than the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Instagram just suspended the Libs of Tiktok account, I report, while a recent Brookings study shows that the Chinese government's narratives are polluting Google and Bing search results on a regular basis. Google News and YouTube do the worst job of keeping the party line out of searches. Both Google News and YouTube return CCP-influenced links on the first page about a quarter of the time.               I ask Sultan Meghji to shed some light on the remarkable TerraUSD cryptocurrency crash. Which leads us, not surprisingly, from massive investor losses to whether financial regulators have jurisdiction over cryptocurrency. The short answer: Whether they have jurisdiction or not, all the incentives favor an assertion of jurisdiction. Nick Weaver is with us in spirit as we flag his rip-roaring attack on the whole fiel—a don't-miss interview for readers who can't get enough of Nick.  It's a big episode for artificial intelligence (AI) news too. Matthew Heiman contrasts the different approaches to AI regulation in three big jurisdictions. China's is pretty focused, Europe's is ambitious and all-pervading, and the United States isn't ready to do anything.  Paul thinks DuckDuckGo should be DuckDuckGone after the search engine allowed Microsoft trackers to follow users of its browser.  Sultan and I explore ways of biasing AI algorithms. It turns out that saving money on datasets makes the algorithm especially sensitive to the order in which the data is presented. Debiasing with synthetic data has its own risks, Sultan avers. But if you're looking for good news, here's some: Self-driving car companies who are late to the party are likely to catch up fast, because they can build on a lot of data that's already been collected as well as new training techniques. Matthew breaks down the $150 million fine paid by Twitter for allowing ad targeting of the phone numbers its users supplied for two-factor authentication (2FA) security purposes. Finally, in quick hits: Matthew recommends that we all get popcorn for: Spain's planned investigation of its intelligence services following a phone hacking scandal. Sultan and I call time of death for the Klobuchar bill regulating Silicon Valley self-preferencing. It was the most likely of all the Silicon Valley competition bills to pass, but election year tensions and massive lobbying campaigns by industry have made its path to enactment too steep. And Sultan notes that the Commerce Department has published with relatively little change its rule restricting exports of hacking tools.     Download the 409th Episode (mp3)   You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families or pets.

The first chief innovation officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation left after only a year on the job. Sultan Meghji cited several systemic barriers that frustrated him into leaving. Meghji's comments got executive editor Jason Miller thinking about what it takes to innovate in the federal government. In his weekly feature the reporter's notebook, Jason asked two former federal executives what it takes to be successful. Jason joined the Federal Drive to discuss what he learned.

Host Peter Gwaltney is joined in the vault with Sultan Meghji, the former Chief Innovation Officer of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Listen in as Meghji shares insights on the digital future of the banking industry and his thoughts on thought leadership for the financial industry and the direction it is headed. This episode is sponsored by RMA Commercial Lending School. If you're interested in learning more about the RMA Commercial Lending school, visit www.ncbankers.org/rma.  

Spurred by a Cyberspace Solarium op-ed, Nate Jones gives an overview of cybersecurity worries in the maritime sector, where there is plenty to worry about. I critique the U.S. government's December 2020 National Maritime Cybersecurity Strategy, a 36-page tome that, when the intro and summary and appendices and blank pages are subtracted, offers only eight pages of substance. Luckily, the Atlantic Council has filled the void with its own report on the topic. Of course, the maritime sector isn't the only one we should be concerned about. Sultan Meghji points to the deeply troubling state of industrial control security, as illustrated by at “10 out of 10” vulnerability recently identified in a Rockwell Automation ICS system.  Still, sometimes software rot serves a good purpose. Maury Shenk tells us about decay in Russia's SORM—a site-blocking system that may be buckling under the weight of the Ukraine invasion. Talking about SORM allows me to trash a nothingburger story perpetrated by three New York Times reporters who ought to know better. Adam Satariano, Paul Mozur and Aaron Krolik should be ashamed of themselves for writing a long story suggesting that Nokia did something wrong by selling Russia telecom gear that enables wiretaps. Since the same wiretap features are required by Western governments as a matter of law, Nokia could hardly do anything else. SORM and its abuses were all carried out by Russian companies. I suspect that, after wading through a boatload of leaked documents, these three (three!) reporters just couldn't admit there was no there, there.  Nate and I note the emergence of a new set of secondary sanctions targets as the Treasury Department begins sanctioning companies that it concludes are part of a sanctions evasion network. We also puzzle over the surprising pushback on proposals to impose  sanctions on Kaspersky. If the Wall Street Journal is correct, and the reason is fear of cyberattacks if the Russian firm is sanctioned, isn't that a reason to sanction them out of Western networks?  Sultan and Maury remind us that regulating cryptocurrency is wildly popular with some, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the EU Parliament. Sultan remains skeptical that sweeping regulation is in the cards. He is much more bullish on Apple's ability to upend the entire fintech field by plunging into financial services with enthusiasm. I point out that it's almost impossible for a financial services company to maintain a standoffish relationship with the government, so Apple may have to change the tune it's been playing in the U.S. for the last decade. Maury and I explore fears that the DMA will break WhatsApp encryption, while Nate and I plumb some of the complexities of a story Brian Krebs broke about hackers exploiting the system by which online services provide subscriber information to law enforcement in an emergency.  Speaking of Krebs, we dig into Ubiquiti's defamation suit against him. The gist of the complaint is that Krebs relied on a “whistleblower” who turned out to be the perp, and that Krebs didn't quickly correct his scoop when that became apparent. My sympathies are with Krebs on this one, at least until Ubiquiti fills in a serious gap in its complaint—the lack of any allegation that the company told Krebs that he'd been misled and asked for a retraction. Without that, it's hard to say that Krebs was negligent (let alone malicious) in reporting allegations by an apparently well-informed insider.  Maury brings us up to speed on the (still half-formed) U.K. online harms bill and explains why the U.K. government was willing to let the subsidiary of a Chinese company buy the U.K.'s biggest chip foundry. Sultan finds several insights in an excellent CNN story about the Great Conti Leak. And, finally, I express my personal qualms about the indictment (for disclosing classified information) of Mark Unkenholz, a highly competent man whom I know from my time in government. To my mind the prosecutors are going to have to establish that Unkenholz was doing something different from the kind of disclosures that are an essential part of working with tech companies that have no security clearances but plenty of tools needed by the intelligence community. This is going to be a story to watch. Download the 401st Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Spurred by a Cyberspace Solarium op-ed, Nate Jones gives an overview of cybersecurity worries in the maritime sector, where there is plenty to worry about. I critique the U.S. government's December 2020 National Maritime Cybersecurity Strategy, a 36-page tome that, when the intro and summary and appendices and blank pages are subtracted, offers only eight pages of substance. Luckily, the Atlantic Council has filled the void with its own report on the topic. Of course, the maritime sector isn't the only one we should be concerned about. Sultan Meghji points to the deeply troubling state of industrial control security, as illustrated by at “10 out of 10” vulnerability recently identified in a Rockwell Automation ICS system.  Still, sometimes software rot serves a good purpose. Maury Shenk tells us about decay in Russia's SORM—a site-blocking system that may be buckling under the weight of the Ukraine invasion. Talking about SORM allows me to trash a nothingburger story perpetrated by three New York Times reporters who ought to know better. Adam Satariano, Paul Mozur and Aaron Krolik should be ashamed of themselves for writing a long story suggesting that Nokia did something wrong by selling Russia telecom gear that enables wiretaps. Since the same wiretap features are required by Western governments as a matter of law, Nokia could hardly do anything else. SORM and its abuses were all carried out by Russian companies. I suspect that, after wading through a boatload of leaked documents, these three (three!) reporters just couldn't admit there was no there, there.  Nate and I note the emergence of a new set of secondary sanctions targets as the Treasury Department begins sanctioning companies that it concludes are part of a sanctions evasion network. We also puzzle over the surprising pushback on proposals to impose  sanctions on Kaspersky. If the Wall Street Journal is correct, and the reason is fear of cyberattacks if the Russian firm is sanctioned, isn't that a reason to sanction them out of Western networks?  Sultan and Maury remind us that regulating cryptocurrency is wildly popular with some, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the EU Parliament. Sultan remains skeptical that sweeping regulation is in the cards. He is much more bullish on Apple's ability to upend the entire fintech field by plunging into financial services with enthusiasm. I point out that it's almost impossible for a financial services company to maintain a standoffish relationship with the government, so Apple may have to change the tune it's been playing in the U.S. for the last decade. Maury and I explore fears that the DMA will break WhatsApp encryption, while Nate and I plumb some of the complexities of a story Brian Krebs broke about hackers exploiting the system by which online services provide subscriber information to law enforcement in an emergency.  Speaking of Krebs, we dig into Ubiquiti's defamation suit against him. The gist of the complaint is that Krebs relied on a “whistleblower” who turned out to be the perp, and that Krebs didn't quickly correct his scoop when that became apparent. My sympathies are with Krebs on this one, at least until Ubiquiti fills in a serious gap in its complaint—the lack of any allegation that the company told Krebs that he'd been misled and asked for a retraction. Without that, it's hard to say that Krebs was negligent (let alone malicious) in reporting allegations by an apparently well-informed insider.  Maury brings us up to speed on the (still half-formed) U.K. online harms bill and explains why the U.K. government was willing to let the subsidiary of a Chinese company buy the U.K.'s biggest chip foundry. Sultan finds several insights in an excellent CNN story about the Great Conti Leak. And, finally, I express my personal qualms about the indictment (for disclosing classified information) of Mark Unkenholz, a highly competent man whom I know from my time in government. To my mind the prosecutors are going to have to establish that Unkenholz was doing something different from the kind of disclosures that are an essential part of working with tech companies that have no security clearances but plenty of tools needed by the intelligence community. This is going to be a story to watch. Download the 401st Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Podcast: The Cyberlaw Podcast (LS 47 · TOP 1% what is this?)Episode: Episode 401: All at Sea: Maritime CybersecurityPub date: 2022-04-04Spurred by a Cyberspace Solarium op-ed, Nate Jones gives an overview of cybersecurity worries in the maritime sector, where there is plenty to worry about. I critique the U.S. government's December 2020 National Maritime Cybersecurity Strategy, a 36-page tome that, when the intro and summary and appendices and blank pages are subtracted, offers only eight pages of substance. Luckily, the Atlantic Council has filled the void with its own report on the topic.; Of course, the maritime sector isn't the only one we should be concerned about. Sultan Meghji points to the deeply troubling state of industrial control security, as illustrated by at "10 out of 10" vulnerability recently identified in a Rockwell Automation ICS.; Still, sometimes software rot serves a good purpose. Maury Shenk tells us about decay in Russia's SORM – a site-blocking system that may be buckling under the weight of the Ukraine invasion. Talking about SORM allows me to trash a nothingburger story perpetrated by three New York Times reporters who ought to know better. Adam Satariano, Paul Mozur and Aaron Krolik should be ashamed of themselves for writing a long story suggesting that Nokia did something wrong by selling Russian telecom gear that enables wiretaps. Since the same wiretap features are required by Western governments as a matter of law, Nokia could hardly do anything else. SORM and its abuses were all carried out by Russian companies. I suspect that, after wading through a boatload of leaked documents, these three (three!) reporters just couldn't admit there was no there, there.; Nate and I note the emergence of a new set of secondary sanctions targets as Treasury begins sanctioning companies that it concludes are part of a sanctions evasion network. We also puzzle over the surprising pushback on proposals to impose sanctions on If the WSJ is correct, and the reason is fear of cyberattacks if the Russian firm is sanctioned, isn't that a reason to sanction them out of Western networks?; Sultan and Maury remind us that regulating cryptocurrency is wildly popular with some, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the EU Parliament. Sultan remains skeptical that sweeping regulation is in the cards. He is much more bullish on Apple's ability to upend the entire fintech field by plunging into financial services with enthusiasm. I point out that it's almost impossible for a financial services company to maintain a standoffish relationship with government, so Apple may have to change the tune it's been playing in the U.S. for the last decade.; Maury and I explore fears that the DMA will break WhatsApp encryption, while Nate and I plumb some of the complexities of a story Brian Krebs broke about hackers exploiting the system by which online services provide subscriber information to law enforcement in an emergency.; Speaking of Krebs, we dig into Ubiquiti's defamation suit against him. The gist of the complaint is that Krebs relied on a "whistleblower" who turned out to be the perp, and that Krebs didn't quickly correct his scoop when that became apparent. My sympathies are with Krebs on this one, at least until Ubiquiti fills in a serious gap in its complaint – the lack of any allegation that the company told Krebs that he'd been misled and asked for a retraction. Without that, it's hard to say that Krebs was negligent (let alone malicious) in reporting allegations by an apparently well-informed insider.; Maury brings us up to speed on the (still half-formed) K. online harms bill and explains why the U.K. government was willing to let the subsidiary of a Chinese company buy the U.K.'s biggest chip foundry. Sultan finds several insights in an excellent CNN story about the Great Conti Leak.; And, finally, I express my personal qualms about the indictment (for disclosing classified information) of Mark Unkenholz, a highly competent man whom I know from my time in government. To my mind, the prosecutors are going to have to establish that Unkenholz was doing something different from the kind of disclosures that are an essential part of working with tech companies that have no security clearances but plenty of tools needed by the intelligence community. This is going to be a story to watch.; Download the 401st Episode (mp3).; Subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast:; As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug!; The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Steptoe & Johnson LLP, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.

The U.S. financial system and the way it's regulated, are fast moving to obsolescence. And the government is unwilling and unable to adopt the technologies to modernize them. That's according to my next guest. He spent more than three years trying, as the first chief innovation officer at the FDIC. Sultan Meghji left the agency last month, and joined the Federal Drive with why.

In episode 10 of Barclay Damon Live: Cyber Sip, a bonus segment featuring Sultan Meghji, host Kevin Szczepanski learns more about the former FDIC chief innovation officer's experience at the federal agency and why he left after a year. Not surprisingly, Sultan, an innovative 30-year veteran of the security and technological sectors, found politics and bureaucracy to be impediments to accomplishing his goals. As Sultan wrote in a recent Bloomberg opinion piece, he has recommendations for overcoming tech hesitancy and maximizing the public sector's use of innovative technologies that include civil service reform, education and training, and more government collaboration with companies, universities, and international partners. Listen in for more. Disclaimer: This material is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion, and no attorney-client relationship has been established or implied. Thanks for listening.

In episode 9 of the Barclay Damon Live podcast Cyber Sip, host Kevin Szczepanski talks with industry leader and scholar Sultan Meghji, who recently served as the first chief innovation officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The episode, the first in a two-part series, delves into Sultan's experience at the FDIC, where despite his mandate to transform how the agency operates; assess the US banking ecosystem in terms of cybersecurity, resilience, and equity; and strategize the agency's interoperations with all of its regulatory partners, he encountered a gamut of attitudes, from hesitant to resistant. Listen in to hear Sultan speak to why he doesn't want “analog people making digital decisions.” Disclaimer: This material is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion, and no attorney-client relationship has been established or implied. Thanks for listening.

Meghji only made it a year as chief innovation officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. before leaving in recent weeks. He describes the obstacles to new ideas within federal banking agencies and banking itself.

On this episode of the podcast, Grizz sits down with two former US financial regulators, Sultan Meghji (former FDIC Chief Innovation Officer) and Jennifer Lassiter (founding member of the Innovation Lab at the FDIC), to discuss the regulator perspective on open source in financial services. There are ups and downs, twists and turns, and we also discuss the value of using open source as a tool to attract and retain talent both in financial services, and for financial regulators as well. Sultan Meghji https://www.linkedin.com/in/sultanmeghji/ Former FDIC Chief Innovation Officer, 30 years of tech background. Current Scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, member of Bretton Woods and Professor at Washington University. Jennifer Lassiter - Executive Director, The Digital Dollar Project & Former Founding Member of the Innovation Lab at the FDIC https://www.linkedin.com/in/jbrookslassiter/ As Executive Director of The Digital Dollar Project (DDP), Jennifer convenes private sector thought leaders to explore the future of money and advance the exploration of a U.S. central bank digital currency. Prior to joining DDP, Jennifer served as a founding member of the Innovation Lab at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and was a senior leader in the Innovation and Technology Offices at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. During her career as a civil servant, Jennifer stood up the first U.S. financial regulator Tech Sprint Program; elevated the use of data science and analytics to executive levels; and built and scaled an award-winning design-centric technology team that changed how technology and data shaped federal regulation. This included leading teams that collaborated with the United States Digital Service to create the first iteration of the U.S. Web Design System and participated in the drafting of the first U.S. Federal Source Code policy. OSSF is now OSFF - Dates - Call For Papers Now Open! Open Source in Finance Forum - https://events.linuxfoundation.org/open-source-finance-forum/ OSFF London Call for Proposals - https://events.linuxfoundation.org/open-source-finance-forum-london/program/cfp/ OSFF New York Call for Proposals - https://events.linuxfoundation.org/open-source-finance-forum-new-york/program/cfp/ Grizz's Info | https://www.linkedin.com/in/aarongriswold/ | grizz@finos.org ►► Visit FINOS www.finos.org ►► Get In Touch: info@finos.org

Much of this episode is devoted to new digital curtain falling across Europe. Gus Horwitz and Mark-MacCarthy review the tech boycott that has seen companies like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft and Adobe pull their service from Russia. Nick Weaver describes how Russia cracked down on independent Russian media outlets and blocked access to the websites of foreign media including the BBC and Facebook. Gus reports on an apparent Russian decision to require all servers and domains to transfer Russian zone, thereby disconnecting itself from the global internet.  Mark describes how private companies in the U.S. have excluded Russian media from their systems, including how DirecTV's decision to drop RT America led the Russian 24-hour news channel to shutter its operations. In contrast, the EU officially shut down all RT and Sputnik operations, including their apps and websites. Nick wonders if the enforcement mechanism is up to the task of taking down the websites. Gus, Dave and Mark discuss the myth making in social media about the Ukrainian war such as the Ghost of Kyiv, and wonder if fiction might do some good to keep up the morale of the besieged country.  Dave Aitel reminds us that despite the apparent lack of cyberattacks in the war, more might be going on under the surface. He also he tells us more about the internal attack that affected the Conti Ransomware gang when they voiced support for Russia. Nick opines that cryptocurrencies do not have the volume to serve as an effective way around the financial sanctions against Russia. Sultan Meghji agrees that the financial sanctions will accelerate the move away from the dollar as the world's reserve currency and is skeptical that a principles-based constraint will do much good to halt that trend.  A few things happened other than the war in Ukraine, including President Biden's first state of the union address. Gus notices that much of the speech was devoted to tech. He notes that the presence in the audience of Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower, highlighted Biden's embrace of stronger online children's privacy laws and that the presence of Intel CEO Patrick Gelsinger gave the president the opportunity to pitch his plan to support domestic chip production.  Sultan and Dave discuss the cybersecurity bill that passed out of the Senate unanimously. It would require companies in critical sectors to report cyberattacks and ransomware to the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). They also analyze the concerns that companies have about providing information to the FBI. Dave thinks the bills that were discussed in this week's House Commerce hearing to hold Big Tech accountable, respond to wide-spread public concerns about tech's surveillance business model, but still he thinks they are unlikely to make it through the process to become law.  Gus says that Amazon's certification that it has responded to the Federal Trade Commission's inquiries about its proposed $6.5 billion MGM merger triggers a statutory deadline for the agency to act. It is not the company's fault, he says, that the agency has a 2-2 between Democrats and Republicans that will likely prevent them opposing the merger in time. I take the opportunity to note that the Senate Commerce committee sent the nominations of Alvaro Bedoya for the Federal Trade Commission and Gigi Sohn for the Federal Communications Commission to the Senate floor, but that it would likely be several months before the full Senate would act on the nominations. Finally, Nick argues that certain measures in the European Commission's proposed digital identity framework, aiming to improve authentication on the web, would in practice have the opposite effect of dramatically weakening web security. Download the 397th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Much of this episode is devoted to new digital curtain falling across Europe. Gus Horwitz and Mark-MacCarthy review the tech boycott that has seen companies like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft and Adobe pull their service from Russia. Nick Weaver describes how Russia cracked down on independent Russian media outlets and blocked access to the websites of foreign media including the BBC and Facebook. Gus reports on an apparent Russian decision to require all servers and domains to transfer Russian zone, thereby disconnecting itself from the global internet.  Mark describes how private companies in the U.S. have excluded Russian media from their systems, including how DirecTV's decision to drop RT America led the Russian 24-hour news channel to shutter its operations. In contrast, the EU officially shut down all RT and Sputnik operations, including their apps and websites. Nick wonders if the enforcement mechanism is up to the task of taking down the websites. Gus, Dave and Mark discuss the myth making in social media about the Ukrainian war such as the Ghost of Kyiv, and wonder if fiction might do some good to keep up the morale of the besieged country.  Dave Aitel reminds us that despite the apparent lack of cyberattacks in the war, more might be going on under the surface. He also he tells us more about the internal attack that affected the Conti Ransomware gang when they voiced support for Russia. Nick opines that cryptocurrencies do not have the volume to serve as an effective way around the financial sanctions against Russia. Sultan Meghji agrees that the financial sanctions will accelerate the move away from the dollar as the world's reserve currency and is skeptical that a principles-based constraint will do much good to halt that trend.  A few things happened other than the war in Ukraine, including President Biden's first state of the union address. Gus notices that much of the speech was devoted to tech. He notes that the presence in the audience of Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower, highlighted Biden's embrace of stronger online children's privacy laws and that the presence of Intel CEO Patrick Gelsinger gave the president the opportunity to pitch his plan to support domestic chip production.  Sultan and Dave discuss the cybersecurity bill that passed out of the Senate unanimously. It would require companies in critical sectors to report cyberattacks and ransomware to the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). They also analyze the concerns that companies have about providing information to the FBI. Dave thinks the bills that were discussed in this week's House Commerce hearing to hold Big Tech accountable, respond to wide-spread public concerns about tech's surveillance business model, but still he thinks they are unlikely to make it through the process to become law.  Gus says that Amazon's certification that it has responded to the Federal Trade Commission's inquiries about its proposed $6.5 billion MGM merger triggers a statutory deadline for the agency to act. It is not the company's fault, he says, that the agency has a 2-2 between Democrats and Republicans that will likely prevent them opposing the merger in time. I take the opportunity to note that the Senate Commerce committee sent the nominations of Alvaro Bedoya for the Federal Trade Commission and Gigi Sohn for the Federal Communications Commission to the Senate floor, but that it would likely be several months before the full Senate would act on the nominations. Finally, Nick argues that certain measures in the European Commission's proposed digital identity framework, aiming to improve authentication on the web, would in practice have the opposite effect of dramatically weakening web security. Download the 397th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Another busy week of fintech news where we discussed Sultan Meghji and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), SoFi and Technisys, Citi, Nubank, Chime, ETHDenver, Clearco, the #metaverse, #bitcoin and more.Connect with Fintech One-on-One: Tweet me @PeterRenton Connect with me on LinkedIn Find previous Fintech One-on-One episodes

When you hear the words inclusion and resilience, do you think about the future of banking? According to this episode of The Yield, you should. Join Peter Kerr, CFA as he sits down with Sultan Meghji, Chief Innovation Officer at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to discuss the future of the Financial Sector.  Prior to joining the FDIC, Sultan spent his entire career in technology. Now, his mission is to bring the innovations of the future to the FDIC to ensure U.S. Banks are run safely and soundly, as well as inclusively.Key Takeaways:[1:43] The 4 pillars in the mission of the Chief Innovation Officer at the FDIC illustrate that the future of banking is in very good hands.[5:10] A high-level overview of the FDIC consumer mission and their relationship with the Federal Reserve.[9:25] Increasing inclusion and serving the underbanked starts with removing the biases that put the underbanked at a disadvantage.[13:08] Does banking consolidation have a negative impact on the underbanked? It might, depending on where you live.[17:32] Fintechs and startups might like to bend tradition, but they're still playing by the rules. Does this result in regulatory problems or just human problems?[19:51] Resilience in the face of threats to consumer data is more essential than ever.[23:20] Cyber security, climate change and the other problems that are keeping Sultan up at night.[26:14] Challenges of transitioning from the speed of the private sector to the much slower public sector.[31:17] What does the future of banking look like from within the FDIC?[33:20] Different pathways consumers can take to avoid the biases that the FDIC is working to remove.[38:00] Countries that are getting regulatory banking rights are inspiring change in the US.[40:10] Sultan's thoughts on NFTs and the exciting future of fintech.Mentioned in This Episode:Yieldstreet

Reaching and serving people without bank accounts has been a persistent challenge for federal agencies. But on the hunch that banks themselves could helped the so-called un-banked, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has launched a tech-sprint to come up with what it describes as technologies and techniques to do just that. The Federal Drive's talked about all that with the FDIC's chief innovation officer, Sultan Meghji.

Today's guest: Sultan Meghji, the first ever Chief Innovation Officer for the FDIC. Sultan knows the challenges of innovation in banking first as co-founder of Neocova, a fintech providing secure, cloud-native, artificial intelligence-based software for community banks. In addition, he worked on an aid mission to help implement digital banking in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, and worked with fintechs and central banks to create peer-to-peer banking solutions for hundreds of thousands of people in underserved areas of Africa and Central Asia. Sultan served as an advisor to the U.S. Treasury, the Group of Seven (G7), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the areas of cybersecurity, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence.We discuss the tension between innovation and safety, the challenges of regulation and how the FDIC is responding to the changing nature of finance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggJrUc3Xzrg

In our talk, Sultan lays out the themes of the agency's innovation work and says that the most urgent one is financial inclusion. He says the evolution of the banking system has lagged the evolution of the population, and talks about how it needs to be “engineered.” He also talks about using technology to build the system's resilience, its ability to “take a punch.” He looks, too, at how to “protect the future,” to keep up with trends like digital assets, AI and, as he says, “banking on Mars.”

In this week's podcast, Bank Automation News tackles the question of what banks can expect from regulatory agencies when it comes to deploying artificial intelligence (AI) in financial services. AI may offer a competitive advantage for U.S. companies, Sultan Meghji, the FDIC's new chief innovation officer, told BAN. And while he said AI should be tested for bias, he stated that “the vast majority of artificial intelligence in the banking system has nothing to do with making credit decisions.” The BAN team also discusses here how banks are leveraging AI for credit scoring, particularly for those without credit, and the ethical issues that crop up with AI-driven decisioning.  Find a discussion of these topics and more in today's episode of the Weekly Wrap with Publisher JJ Hornblass, Editor Myra Thomas, Associate Editors Jaspreet Kalra and Loraine Lawson for the week ended June 4, 2021. 

This episode features an interview with Jason Fagone, journalist and author of The Woman Who Smashed Codes: A True Story of Love, Spies, and the Unlikely Heroine Who Outwitted America's Enemies. I wax enthusiastic about Jason's book, which features remarkable research, a plot like a historical novel, and deep insights into what I call the National Security Agency's (NSA) “pre-history”—the years from 1917 through 1940 when the need for cryptanalysis was only dimly perceived by the US government. Elizebeth and William Friedman more or less invented American cryptanalysis in those years, but the full story was never known, even to NSAers. It was protected by a force even stronger even than classification—J. Edgar Hoover's indomitable determination to get good press for the FBI even when all the credit belonged elsewhere. And, at all its crucial stages, that prehistory is a love story that lasted, literally, right to the grave. Don't miss this (long!) interview with Jason Fagone, or his book. Meanwhile, in the news roundup. Dmitri Alperovitch covers the latest events in what we just can't call the SolarWinds hack any more. There's no doubt that Microsoft code is at the center of the hack, though not because of unintended features; the hackers showed great interest in Microsoft's code. Dmitri predicts multiple executive orders from Anne Neuberger's review, and he hopes it means more centralization of federal civilian security monitoring and policy under the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Dmitri and I agree that the Congressional effort to turn the cybersecurity director position into a Senate-confirmed White House office is more trouble than it's worth. The Maryland law imposing taxes on Google and Facebook ad revenue is ground-breaking, and for that reason, it will also be heavily litigated. First time caller, first time listener David Fruchtman explains the tax and the litigation it has already spawned. Which came first, China's dream of a rare-earth boycott or U.S. nightmares of a rare-earth boycott? We ask Jordan Schneider, who suggests that neither the dream nor the nightmare is likely to come true any time soon. Is Australia going to war with Big Tech?  I take on Oz's link fee and end up siding, improbably, with Mike Masnick and Facebook and against the fee. Meanwhile, the Australian infrastructure protection bill is drawing fire from Microsoft. Dmitri leans toward Microsoft's view that the law should not give government authority to intervene when a private sector entity is unable or unwilling to respond to an attack.  I lean toward the government. Jordan Schneider reviews the latest stories of tech companies getting a little too close for comfort to the Chinese surveillance state. The ByteDance censorship story is compelling but not new.  The Oracle story is compelling, new, and a clever piece of journalism by another alumna of the podcast, Mara Hvistendahl: Feeding the Beast: How Oracle Sells Repression in China  Finally, in a series of quick bites, we cover: U.S. charges against three North Koreans who boosted national GDP appreciably with their hacks.  The ongoing Jones Day Doxtorsion.  France's discovery that GRU hackers successfully targeted Centreon servers for years, and Sultan Meghji's departure from The Cyberlaw Podcast for some damn thing or other. And more! Download the 350th Episode (mp3)  You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

It's a story that has everything, except a reporter able to tell it. A hostile state attacking the U.S. power grid is a longstanding and quite plausible national security concern. The Trump administration was galvanized by the threat, even seizing Chinese power equipment at the port to do a detailed breakdown and then issuing an executive order and follow-up rulings designed to cut Chinese products from the supply chain. Yet the Biden administration suspended this order for 90 days—the only Trump cybersecurity order to be called into question so far. Industry lobbying? Chinese maneuvering? Tech uncertainty?  No one knows, but Brian Egan and I at least sketch the outlines of an irresistible story that will have to wait for a persistent journalist. The SolarWinds story needs a new moniker, as the compromises spread beyond the scope of SolarWinds distributions to victims like Malwarebytes. Increasingly, it looks as though Microsoft and its cloud are the common denominators, Sultan Meghji and I observe, but that's one moniker the story will never acquire. In other cyber news, the Chinese are stealing airline passenger reservation data, Sultan notes. Maybe they're just trying to find out when Mike Pompeo next plans to come to China so they can meet him at the airport and enforce their latest sanctions—no Great Wall tours for you, Mr. Secretary! This is our last week of Trumpian cyber news, so we wallow in it. The President issued a last-minute order calling for an assessment of the security risks of Chinese drones, Maury Shenk tells us. And Brian unpacks the other last-minute order requiring U.S. cloud providers to know which foreigners they are selling virtual machines to. I claim victory in my short letter to former Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin, suggesting that, instead of jamming a cryptocurrency regulation through on his watch, he concentrates on convincing the newly confirmed Secretary Janet Yellen to carry through.  If he took my advice, it seems to have worked. Sultan reports that she is showing signs of wanting to "curtail" cryptocurrency.  In other news, Sultan boldly predicts the advent of interplanetary cryptocurrency in Elon Musk's lifetime. Brian and I unpack the latest Cyberspace Solarium Commission product—Transition Book—which is persuasive for the Biden administration. I predict that the statutorily mandated cybersecurity director will have to be subordinated to the deputy national security adviser for cybersecurity for the office to be accepted in the administration. And in quick hits, Maury covers the surprisingly robust European enforcement of employee protections against video surveillance. I explain Parler's loss in trying to overturn the Amazon Web Services ban that pushed it off the internet. Sultan explains why the Biden Peloton is a cybersecurity risk, and I tip my hat to the president's physical fitness.   I summarize the Michael Ellis story; he held the job of NSA's general counsel for about a day before a political witch-hunt caught up with him, and may never serve another day.   And, finally, a little schadenfreude for the European Parliament, which is being investigated by the EU's lead data regulator for poor cookie notices on a website it set up for Members of the European Parliament to book coronavirus tests. The complainant? Max Schrems, who is on his way to becoming as unpopular with European politicos as he is in the U.S. And more!   Download the 346th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

2021 banking technology upgrade suggestions How do banks stay accountable with their cybersecurity? What changes in political leadership could impact banking technology? Where will technology in banking be in a few years? Why bankers should stay optimistic during 2021!

In this episode, I interview Zach Dorfman about his excellent reports in Foreign Policy about U.S.-Chinese intelligence competition in the last decade. Zach is a well-regarded national security journalist, a senior staff writer at the Aspen Institute's Cyber and Technology program and a senior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs. We dive deep into his tale of how the CIA achieved remarkable penetration of the Chinese government and then lost it, inspiring China to build a far more professional and formidable global intelligence network. In the news roundup, we touch on the disgraceful riot at the Capitol this week, and I criticize Silicon Valley's rush to score points against the right in a way it never did with the BLM demonstrations last summer. Nate Jones disagrees with my take, but we manage to successfully predict Parler's shift from platform to (antitrust) plaintiff and to bond over my proposal to impose heavy taxes on social media with more than ten million users. Really, why spend three years in court trying to break‘em up when you can get them to do it themselves and raise money to boot? SolarWinds keep blowing. Sultan Meghji and Zach Dorfman give us the latest on the attribution to Russia, the fine difference between attack and espionage and the likelihood of direct or indirect regulation. Pete Jeydel and Sultan cover the latest round of penalties imposed by the rapidly dwindling Trump administration on Chinese companies. Nate dehypes the UK High Court decision supposedly ruling mass hacking illegal. He previews some Biden appointments, and we talk about the surprising rise of career talent and why that might be happening. Nate also critiques former Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell after accusations of politicization of intelligence. I'm kinder. But not when I condemn Distributed Denial of Services for joining forces with ransomware gangs to punish victims; it's hard to believe that anyone could make Julian Assange and Wikileaks look responsible, but they do. Speaking of Julian, he's won another Pyrrhic victory in court – likely extending his imprisonment with another temporizing win. And more! Download the 344th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Did you ever wonder where all that tech money came from all of a sudden? Turns out, a lot of it comes from online programmatic ads, an industry that gets little attention even from the companies, such as Google, that it made wealthy. That lack of attention is pretty ironic, because lack of attention is what's going to kill the industry, according to Tim Hwang, former Google policy maven and current research fellow at the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET). In our interview, Tim Hwang explains the remarkably complex industry and the dynamics that are gradually leaching the value out of its value proposition. Tim thinks we're in an attention bubble, and the popping will be messy.  I'm persuaded the bubble is here but not that its end will be disastrous outside of Silicon Valley. Sultan Meghji and I celebrate what seems like excellent news about a practical artificial intelligence (AI) achievement in predicting protein folding. It's a big deal, and an ideal problem for AI, with one exception.  The parts of the problem that AI hasn't solved would be a lot easier for humans to work on if AI could tell us how it solved the parts it did figure out.  Explainability, it turns out, is the key to collaborative AI-human work. We welcome first time participant and long-time listener Jordan Schneider to the panel. Jordan is the host of the unmissable ChinaTalk podcast. Given his expertise, we naturally ask him about … Australia.  Actually, it's natural, because Australia is now the testing ground for many of China's efforts to exercise power over independent countries using cyber power along with trade. Among the highlights: Chinese tweets highlighting a report about Australian war crimes followed by a ham-handed tweet-boosting bot campaigns. And in a move that ought to be featured in future justifications of the Trump administration's ban on WeChat, the platform refused to carry the Australian prime minister's criticism of the war-crimes tweet.  Ted Cruz, call your office! And this will have to be Sen. Cruz's fight, because it looks more and more as though the Trump administration has thrown in the towel. Its claim that it is negotiating a TikTok sale after ordering divestment is getting thinner; now the divestment deadline has completely disappeared, as the government simply says that negotiations continue. Nick Weaver is on track to win his bet with me that CFIUS won't make good on its order before the mess is shoveled onto Joe Biden's plate. Whoever was in charge of beating up WeChat and TikTok may have left the government early, but the team that's sticking pins in other Chinese companies is still hard at work. Jordan and Brian Egan talk about the addition of SMIC to the amorphous defense blacklist. And Congress has passed a law (awaiting the president's signature) that will make life hard for Chinese firms listed on U.S. exchanges.  China, meanwhile, isn't taking this lying down, Jordan reports. It is mirror-imaging all the Western laws that it sees as targeting China, including bans on exports of Chinese products and technology. It is racing (on what Jordan thinks is a twenty-year pace) to create its own chip design capabilities. And with some success. Sultan takes some of the hype out of China's claims to quantum supremacy.  Though even dehyped, China's achievement should be making those who rely on RSA-style crypto just a bit nervous (that's all of us, by the way). Michael Weiner previews the still veiled state antitrust lawsuit against Facebook and promises to come back with details as soon as it's filed.  In quick hits, I explain why we haven't covered the Iranian claim that their scientist was rubbed out by an Israeli killer robot machine gun: I don't actually believe them. Brian explains that another law aimed at China and its use of Xinjian forced labor is attracting lobbyists but likely to pass. Apple, Nike, and Coca-Cola have all taken hits for lobbying on the bill; none of them say they oppose the bill, but it turns out there's a reason for that. Lobbyists have largely picked the bones clean. President Trump is leaving office in typical fashion—gesturing in the right direction but uninteresting in actually getting there. In a “Too Much Too Late” negotiating move, the President has threatened to veto the defense authorization act if it doesn't include a repeal of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. If he's yearning to wield the veto, the Democrats and GOP alike seem willing to give him the chance.  They may even override, or wait until January 20 to pass it again.  Finally, I commend to interested listeners the oral argument in the Supreme Court's Van Buren case, about the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The solicitor general's footwork in making up quasi textual limitations on the more sweeping readings of the act is admirable, and it may well be enough to keep van Buren in jail, where he probably belongs for some crime, if not this one.  And more. Download the 341st Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

This episode's interview with Dr. Peter Pry of the EMP Commission raises an awkward question: Is it possible that North Korea has already developed nuclear weapons that could cause the deaths of hundreds of millions of Americans by permanently frying the entire electrical infrastructure with a single high-altitude blast?  And if he doesn't, could the sun accomplish pretty much the same thing?  The common factor in both scenarios is EMP—electro-magnetic pulse. And we explore the problem in detail, from the capabilities of adversaries to the controversy that has pitted Dr. Pry and the EMP Commission against the power industry and the Energy Department, which are decidedly more confident that the U.S. would withstand a major EMP event. And, for those disinclined to trust those sources, Dr. Pry offers a few tips on how to make it more likely that your systems will survive an EMP. In the news, that the election turned out not to be hacked and not to be violence-plagued and not to be the subject of serious disinformation. That didn't stop Twitter and YouTube from limiting Steve Bannon's access to the platform when he used hyperbole (“heads on pikes”) to express his unhappiness with Dr. Fauci. In legal tech news, Michael Weiner explains what's at stake in the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit challenging Visa's $5.3 billion acquisition of Plaid. I wonder if that means the department is out of antitrust-litigating ammo.  And it might, except you can buy a lot of ammo with $1 billion worth of Silk Road bitcoins, now being claimed by the U.S. Sultan Meghji says the real question is why it took the U.S. so long to lay claim to the coins. Just when private companies have come up with plans to comply with California's privacy law, the voters change everything. Well, maybe not everything. It looks, Dan Podair suggests, as though compliance with the new CPRA will mostly involve complying with the old CCPA plus a whole bunch more. I'm fascinated by the idea that the initiatives say, “Oh, and by the way, this law can't be amended except to make it more privacy friendly.” We bring Michael back to the conversation to brief us on the FTC's plan to bring an antitrust case against Facebook using internal hearing procedure. Michael admits that some might call that a kangaroo court hearing; I suggest that LabMD's Mike Dougherty be called as an expert witness. Sultan and I note the ongoing failure of media and rights groups to toxify facial recognition; now it's being used on “mostly peaceful” protestors. And it's hard to argue with using face recognition when it confirms a picture ID left behind in Lafayette Square. Next, Sultan and I take on Toxification II, the argument to make people believe that racist—as opposed to poorly trained—artificial intelligence is a thing. Charles Helleputte analyzes the latest rumor that the EU is planning to prohibit end-to-end crypto. He notes that the EU is also pursuing more infrastructure security and wonders whether the two initiatives can be sustained together. It turns out that other people on Zoom can, in theory and under the right conditions, guess what you're typing.  It's one more reason to be careful about webcams and security. I make the sort of cheap joke you've come to expect from me. And more. Download the 337th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

It's a law-heavy tech news week, so this episode is all news. If you come for the interviews, though, do not fear.  We'll be releasing episode 333 tomorrow, and it's all interview, as I talk with David Ignatius about the tech issues in his latest spy novel, The Paladin. To kick things off, Matthew Heiman returns to the podcast to analyze a new decision of the Court of Justice of the EU. The CJEU claims in the headline to put limits on government mass collection of mobile and internet data, but both Matthew and I think the footnotes take away much of the doctrine the headlines proclaim – and maybe in a way that will add another arrow to the US quiver as it tries to work around the CJEU's foolhardy decision in Schrems II. Sultan Meghji tells us that Trickbot has attracted the attention of both Cyber Command and Microsoft's lawyers.  Unfortunately, even that combination isn't proving fatal, and I wonder whether Microsoft's creative lawyering has gone a step too far. The Democratic-controlled House Judiciary Committee has released a blockbuster tech antitrust report. It's hardly news that Democrats and Republicans on this most partisan of committees disagree about this issue, but Matthew and I are struck by how modest the disagreements are.  In contrast, despite our conservative leanings, Matthew and I manage to disagree pretty profoundly on how antitrust principles should apply to Big Tech. Sultan, meanwhile, draws the short straw and has to explain the mother of all metaphor bombs that exploded in the Supreme Court when the court took oral argument in Google v. Oracle. It was a discouraging argument for those of us who admire the Justices, whose skills at finding apt metaphors completely failed them. I offer my past experience as a Supreme Court advocate to critique the argument and lay odds on the outcome. (Short version: Google has a nearly 50-50 chance of winning, and the Court has about the same chance of producing a respectable opinion. Brian Egan joins us to talk about the Justice Department's sober report on how law enforcement can combat terrorist and criminal use of cryptocurrency. I claim to have caught Twitter and Facebook in a clear example of improper suppression of conservative (or at least Trumpist) speech, as they label as misleading a Trump tweet that turns out to be, well, true. Brian and I dig into the latest litigation over banning TikChat from US markets. Short version: the Justice Department has filed a strong brief seeking to overturn WeChat's first amendment protection from the ban. If you're looking for raw disagreement, listen for Brian coming out of his chair when I start comparing Silicon Valley and Chinese Communist Party net censorship regimes. Matthew explains why Sweden and Switzerland are fighting over a crypto company widely reported to have been compromised by US and German intelligence fifty years ago. And for our sensitive male listeners, this may be the point where you turn the podcast off, as I explain the dire consequences of bad IOT security and male chastity devices.  Though, come to think of it, an angle grinder would make a pretty effective chastity device by itself. And more! Oh, and we have new theme music, courtesy of Ken Weissman of Weissman Sound Design.  Hope you like it! Download the 332nd Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

In our 328th episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast, Stewart is joined by Bruce Schneier (@schneierblog), Sultan Meghji @sultanmeghji), and Nate Jones (@n8jones81). The Belfer Center has produced a distinctly idiosyncratic report ranking the world's cyber powers – a kind of Jane's Fighting Nerds report. Bruce Schneier and I puzzle over its oddities, but at least the authors provided the underlying assessments to led them to rank the Netherlands No. 5, and Israel nowhere in the top ten. The US is number one, but that's partly due to the Center's insistence that we're a norms superpower. In my book, that would require a 20% discount off our offensive capabilities ranking.  Don't agree? Download the report and pick your own fight!   Our interview today is with Cory Doctorow, diving deep on his pamphlet/book, “How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism.” It's a robust and entertaining three-cornered fight – me, Cory, and the absent Shoshana Zuboff, whose 700-page tome launched the surveillance capitalism meme. You'll enjoy hearing me explain to Cory, a Red Diaper Baby born to Trotskyists, that his solution to tech's overreach is surprisingly similar to Attorney General Bill Barr's.   Elsewhere in the news roundup, Nate Jones and I unpack the Pandora's Box of pain unleashed by the European Court of Justice in Schrems II.    Facebook is fighting a multilevel rearguard action – in the courts, in two capitals, and in its terms of service -- to try to salvage its current business model.   I cover the latest Tok in the TikTok saga.  Oracle has won … something or other. Sultan Meghji and I puzzle over how the TikTok algorithm can stay in China while the dataset it's training on remains in the United States.    The Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit against Google is getting nearer and nearer, judging from the thrashing in the underbrush. But we still don't have a good idea what part of Google's business will be targeted. Sultan explains the state of play.    In a news flash that I liken in shock value to the report that the weather in San Diego will be sunny and fair, Microsoft has confirmed that the Chinese, Iranians, and Russians have launched cyber-attacks on Biden and Trump campaigns. For reasons unknown, the press can't get enough of this thin gruel.   Bruce and Sultan chart the reasons and tactics behind the rise of ransomware and the importance of being a reliable criminal if you want to make money in extortion.    Nate unpacks China's global data security initiative so you don't have to waste your time. The tl;dr is that other countries shouldn't do any of the things China is doing or aspiring to do.    Speaking of things you don't have to read because we took the hit, Bruce tells us what's in the new White House cyber-security policy for space systems. Really, it's all “shoulds” and puts nobody in charge of enforcement. It would be kind to call it the beta version of a space cybersecurity policy.   Sultan argues that there may after all be a limit to the EU's ability to get every company on the internet to enforce its speech codes, and the domain name registries hope they're on the other side of that line.    You probably saw the “op-ed” that AI “wrote,” explaining why humans need not fear it.   Bruce, Sultan, and I have plenty of fun mocking Open AI's penchant for Open Hype.  But Bruce reminds us that sooner or later the hype will be real, and more than half of Twitter will be machines talking to other machines.  Judging from my Twitter feed, that will be an improvement.    Finally,  This Week in Sore Losing: In honor of Jeff Bezos's AWS and its brief complaining that it should have beat Microsoft to the lucrative JEDI contract, I update an old lawyer's motto: If you've got the law on your side, pound the law. If you've got the facts, pound the facts. And if you've got neither, pound the Orange Man.   And more!                                                       Download the 328th Episode (mp3)   You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug!   The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

The big news of the week was the breathtakingly arrogant decision of the European Court of Justice, announcing that it would set the rules for how governments could use personal data in fighting crime and terrorism. Even more gobsmacking, the court decided to impose those rules on every government on the planet – except the members of the European Union, which are beyond its reach. Oh, and along the way the court blew up the Privacy Shield, exposing every transatlantic business to massive liability, and put the EU on a collision course with China over China's most sensitive domestic security operations. This won't end well. Paul Hughes helps me make sense of the decision. In the interview, I talk to Darrell West, co-author of Turning Point—Policymaking in the Era of Artificial Intelligence. We mostly agree on where AI is already making a difference, where it's still hype, and how it will transform war. Where we disagree is over the policy prescriptions for avoiding the worst outcomes. I disagree with the relentless focus of the book (and every other book in recent years) on the questionable claim of AI bias, and Darrell and I have a spirited disagreement over my claim that his prescription will hide numerical racial and gender quotas in every aspect of life that AI touches. Iranian cyberspies make pretty good training videos, Sultan Meghji tells us, but they're not taking any bows after leaving the videos exposed online. If you thought Twitter's content resembled middle school, wait until you see their security measures in action. Nate Jones has the details, but my takeaway is that middle school science projects are usually handled a lot more responsibly than Twitter's “god mode” dashboard. BIPA, the Illinois biometric privacy act, has inspired lawsuits against users of a database assembled to reduce AI bias. Mark MacCarthy explains that the law prohibits the use of biometrics (like pictures of your face) without consent. I observe that this makes BIPA the COVID-19 of privacy law.  Anyone who touches this database will be infected with liability, at least if the plaintiff's surprisingly plausible theory holds up. Sultan reminds us that the PRC has now been caught twice requiring companies in China to use tax software with built-in malware. You know what they say: “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.”  I don't think we'll need to wait long to see number three. Nate gives us a former government lawyer's take on the CIA's new authority to conduct cyber covert action. (Yahoo, Lawfare) Ordinarily he'd be skeptical of keeping those decisions away from the White House, but in this case, he'll make an exception. My take: If unshackling the CIA has produced the APT34 and FSB hacks and data dumps, what's not to like? In short hits, I mock the Justice Department spokesperson who claimed that Ghislaine Maxwell was engaged in “a misguided effort to evade detection” when she wrapped her cellphone in tin foil. And Mark and I cross swords over Reddit's capture by the Intolerant Left. You make the call: When Reddit declares that exposing fake hate crimes as hoaxes is a form of hate speech, is that anecdotal evidence of left-wing bias or stone-cold proof of epistemic closure? Download the 325th Episode (mp3). You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Our interview is with Sultan Meghji, CEO of Neocova. We cover the large Chinese investment in quantum technology and what it means for the United States. It's possible that Chinese physicists are even better than American physicists at extracting funding from their government. Indeed, it looks as though some quantum tech, such as the use of entangled particles to identify eavesdropping, may turn out to have dubious military value. But not all. Sultan thinks the threat of special purpose quantum computing to break encryption poses a real, near-term threat to U.S. financial institutions' security. In the News Roundup, we cover the new California Consumer Privacy Act regulations, which devote a surprising amount of their 24 pages to fixing problems caused by the Act's feel-good promise that consumers can access and delete the information companies have on them. Speaking of feel-good laws that are full of liability land mines for companies, the Supreme Court has let stand a Ninth Circuit ruling that allows blind people to sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act if websites don't accommodate their needs. Nick Weaver and I explore the risks of making law by retroactively imposing liability. Weirdly for a populist administration that says it hates the big social platforms for restricting speech, the Trump trade negotiators are actually expanding Section 230 immunities for Silicon Valley that both left and right have begun to question. The expansion is buried in hard-to-amend and even-harder-to-repeal trade agreements. By way of explanation, I explain the Realpolitik of trade deals. As if to prove my point, the U.S. and Japan have signed a Digital Trade Agreement that has much the same provision. Nick and I muse on the rise of Commerce Department sanctions on individual companies. In a way, such sanctions are a less harsh alternative to OFAC boycotts, but like antibiotics, they either destroy the target or teach it to develop better resistance for the future. Does TLS stand for “Tough Luck, Sucker?” That's the message of a new and clever form of malware, softly attributed to the Russian FSB. Apple, having banned, then unbanned an app that locates police activity in Hong Kong, has re-banned it. Tim Cook's explanation triggers Nick's bovine excrement detection system. In a Final Four of Hypocritical Surrender, LeBron and the NBA give ESPN a run for its money. South Park fails to qualify. Matthew Heiman and I discuss India's effort to create a national facial recognition system. Naturally BuzzFeed News thinks it's evil. Nick and I consider DHS's request for the power to subpoena ISPs to identify owners of compromised systems. I critique Herb Lin's suggestion that the ISPs can solve the problem without giving data to DHS. As Matthew notes, it was just last month that the French government gave the world a stiff-necked little lecture on respecting sovereignty in cyberspace. So why are French police helping reprogram computers in Latin America? Because it's different when the French are doing it than when it's done to them, I surmise. A recent “good guy with a keyboard” story offers me one more chance to ask why someone who's rescued hundreds from ransomware should have to worry for one minute about liability for the compromised C2 machines he re-compromised in the rescue. Matthew and I try to simplify a complex ruling from two FISA courts. Among the takeaways: The FBI has been running a lot of searches against 702 databases (3.1 million a year!), and the FISA courts are overusing the Fourth Amendment, which in FISA minimization cases is like trying to do brain surgery with a chainsaw. Argh! That embarrassing Bloomberg Supermicro story is back. Sort of. Wired has shown that something like this could really be done. Which, Nick points out, we already knew. I give a shoutout to Jennifer Daskal and Peter Swire for their useful overview of the U.K.-U.S. CLOUD Act, but I wonder if mutual “no targeting of the other country's nationals” assurances are a scalable solution. Finally, Matthew reviews the second volume of the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation into Russian election interference. The TL;DR? The Russians did what you think they did. Mildly surprising: After starting out just trying to hurt Hillary, by the end the Russians seem to have been trying to help Trump too.   Download the 282nd Episode (mp3). You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed! As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of the firm.