LAS VEGAS — The floor at CES this year isn’t just full of tech companies hawking their newest wares — it’s also packed with think-tankers bringing their own perspective to the convention’s ongoing conversation about how tech is shaping society, and vice versa. The wonks aren’t just here to talk. They want to see what these new gadgets actually do. Policy experts and staffers on both sides of the aisle have a vested interest in getting up to speed on the kinds of consumer-facing gadgets on display here, the better to manage — and argue about — their potential impact on people’s lives. Jordan Shapiro, an economic and data policy analyst at the center-left Progressive Policy Institute, described her eagerness to understand exactly what kind of data-harvesting capabilities are built into the next generation of tech, and what the costs and benefits are. "We want biometric data to be private, but also we need biometric data if we want to make bionic arms, or if we want cars to be able to understand when humans are not paying attention to the road," she said. "I'm really curious to see what types of consumer electronics are starting to collect that hopefully private, but also really high-tech, personalized data." When it comes to tech, PPI occupies an interesting place in the think-tank firmament: A liberal shop, but one affiliated with the moderate New Democrat Coalition. Shapiro and her colleagues described to me, across a marble table in the food court of Vegas’ Venetian Resort, how they think industry, the left, and the right can potentially find a middle ground to push tech innovation forward while protecting the public interest. Even among some thinkers on the right today, there’s a growing consensus that the ethos of “permissionless innovation” that’s defined American tech policy over the past few decades has in large part created the big-picture problems with tech Congress now must tackle. The extent of smartphone data collection and the deleterious side effects of social media, to name two examples, didn’t appear on Washington’s radar until long after they’d taken their toll. There’s a palpable sense at CES that both sides want that to change. "There is a consumer side that perhaps isn't always reflected in the push towards innovation," Shapiro said. "The tech folks want help balancing the subjects they're not always as aware of, like ethics, philosophy, consumer protection, and navigating the regulatory environment while still being allowed to grow and flourish." So it’s not just regulation-friendly, Democratic-aligned think tanks who have skin in the game. We’ve covered extensively how innovation-minded policy thinkers on the right have set their sights on tech as a tool in the struggle for global competitiveness and to rejuvenate American industry. They’re here too. I spoke today with Brandon Pugh, the director of cyber, privacy and emerging threats at the free-market R Street Institute, who landed in Vegas this week with a mind to hatch new ideas about how government can get more active in the tech world without adding too much friction to the sector’s innovation. One issue he sees as crucial: A stronger push on cybersecurity at the federal level, something that will only become more salient with the rise of quantum computing and sophisticated AI technology. “I made a loud request internally that we should have representation here on the cyber[security] side,” Pugh told me. “I think there’s a balance. Government should not be too involved in everyday life, but cyber is an important exception… if we don’t have federal law, states will continue to make their own, which is a nightmare for bureaucracy, consumers, and security all at the same time.” If it’s unexpected for a free-marketeer to be calling for a new national law, that’s just one of many examples of how the accelerating rate of tech innovation is scrambling American politics. Whatever their motivations, tech policy thinkers are increasingly pushing for the same things: Greater consumer protections; more transparency and accountability on the part of tech giants; and a robust support system for domestic innovation and industry to help the U.S. compete with China. "In the think-tank world on the right, the conversations they're having about some of these issues are coming from a completely different direction," said PPI tech policy analyst Malena Dailey, citing issues like censorship of conservative viewpoints. But as she acknowledged,and was apparent in my conversations today, they frequently arrive in the same place: "So there is room for compromise. It might just be in a different spot." Plenty of those spots are on the agenda this week, including an upcoming panel today about blockchain competitiveness, talks on fostering domestic innovation and market competition and how a shifting global trade environment affects all of it. Stay tuned for our coverage tomorrow and Saturday. | 
