Author Archives: Larry Downes

In today’s Wall Street Journal, Larry on the true potential of E-Government

In the Wall Street Journal today, I write, with Blair Levin, about what we see as the best option for DOGE, the proposed advisory group within the White House that is tasked with improving government efficiency and cutting costs.

We propose making a serious effort to shift federal services from inefficient, understaffed and overworked local offices to the Internet, which would of course necessitate considerable upgrades to federal IT systems, as well as completing the build-out of broadband to the 7% of U.S. homes that still do not have a high-speed provider. Subsidies for the poor, and equipment, training, and support for some older Americans will also be necessary.

The build-out has already been funded through the 2021 Infrastructure and Jobs Act.

The rest would have to come out of the savings from shutting down field offices.

Does the Death of the Chevron Doctrine Harm the Business Investment Climate? New for Harvard Business Review

For Harvard Business Review today, Blair Levin and I review two recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court that have dramatically shifted power away from federal regulators and to the federal courts, most notably in overturning the Chevron doctrine, which, since 1984, has been cited over 15,000 times in cases that reviewed challenges to regulations, most of them affecting businesses.

The conventional wisdom is that the Court’s about-face will improve the investment climate for business by limiting the ability of agencies to pass new regulations that either limit activities or require expensive compliance.

We argue the opposite, for reasons explored in the piece:

https://hbr.org/2024/09/the-end-of-the-chevron-doctrine-is-bad-for-business?ab=HP-hero-latest-text-2

For LinkedIn today, how AI will really affect employment

For LinkedIn today, Blair Levin and I on the realities of AI’s potential to destroy jobs, a topic about which pretty much everything written so far has been wrong.

Concern about Generative AI’s potential to displace workers and disrupt markets kicked into high gear in 2022, with the public release of Open AI’s ChatGPT.  AI’s seemingly magical ability to instantly create new works of art and literature has generated a range of responses from delight to outrage, inspiring equally varied efforts to stop or at least slow down the pace of change—in everything from President Biden’s recent Executive Order to strikes by Hollywood actors and writers.

But will large-scale deployment of AI across industries really lead to massive job losses for creative and other professional workers?  The history of previous disruptors suggests the answer is initially yes but ultimately no, a staggered sequence that yields crucial and often counter-intuitive lessons for business, labor, and government.

All stakeholders need to embrace these learnings.  Misguided responses will distract the private and public sectors from implementing strategies to accelerate the adoption of AI, delaying significant social benefits and new job creation that will more than offset the losses. And even the most well-intended efforts to reduce AI’s early impact on jobs are almost certain to fail, diverting us from pragmatic solutions targeted to the most affected workers.

For Harvard Business Review Today, Who Will Really Regulate ChatGPT and Other AI Applications?

My co-author Blair Levin and I are pleased to announce the publication of our latest article for Harvard Business Review.

With the explosive arrival of ChatGPT and other generative AI applications built on Large Language Model neural networks, there has been a frenzy among legislature and regulatory agencies worldwide to determine who and how the new technology will be regulated. Unlike other Big Bang Disruptions, generative AI appears to be an uber-disruptor, breaking the rules of every industry. All at once. But can any regulator keep up with the pace of evolution of AI?

Check out the article here:

Who is Going to Regulate AI?

The Antitrust Attack on Big Technology – New for Harvard Business Review

My co-author Blair Levin and I are pleased to announce the publication of our latest article for Harvard Business Review.

In the last few months, the U.S. federal government has brought two major antitrust cases: one to block Microsoft’s acquisition of game developer Activision, and another against Google aimed at forcing the company to divest some of its advertising businesses. Along with the Federal Trade Commission’s failed effort to stop Meta’s acquisition of a virtual reality startup, an earlier federal case against Google regarding search, multiple ongoing state-level cases against the company, and reports the FTC will soon bring an action against Amazon, it appears that hunting season for large technology companies is in full swing.

For those hoping to close deals in the future, we offer five essential rules to avoid running afoul of regulators.

Check out the article here:

https://hbr.org/2023/02/microsoft-google-and-a-new-era-of-antitrust