Evidence-based analysis of AI policy.
AI policy, argued from the record.
Praxen Policy publishes analysis, whitepapers, briefs and media on how artificial intelligence is governed. It takes a side. AI policy should be built on what the systems do and what the law says. Too much of it is being built on doomerism and on claims nobody checked.
Every piece links its sources and states the other side’s best argument before answering it. Facts and the author’s opinions are kept apart, so you can accept one and reject the other. Praxen builds and sells AI systems. Every piece says so, and says what AI assistance went into writing it. When a piece is wrong, it is corrected in public with a date.
Latest
BRIEF-02
Bloomington banned superintelligence. Its own statute says it couldn't.
A 7–0 vote, $2,500-a-day fines, and a repeal clause that needs 95% of every registered voter. The ordinance cites one law. That law forbids three things the ordinance does. Here is the record, and a complaint an Indiana lawyer can file.
BRIEF-01
To the AI data center haters; yes, you are ALL wrong.
You won the votes. I think enforceable power, noise and tax rules beat a blanket ban. The costs are real in some places. So are the benefits.
Policy Analysis
What four state AI laws actually reach
I tested four state AI laws against one small builder. The catastrophe laws miss it and a paperwork law may hit it. The federal list was due 190 days ago. My view: build faster.
Sections
-
Analysis
Long-form analysis of AI law, regulation and enforcement, argued from the primary record.
-
Whitepapers
Reference papers published on the web and as citable, print-quality PDFs.
-
Briefs
Short briefs, and responses to specific claims in circulation. A response states the claim at full strength before answering it.
-
Media
Talks, interviews and recorded commentary, each with its sources.