What do you think?
Rate this book
Digital Empires: The Global Battle to Regulate Technology
The global battle among the three dominant digital powers―the United States, China, and the European Union―is intensifying. All three regimes are racing to regulate tech companies, with each advancing a competing vision for the digital economy while attempting to expand its sphere of influence in the digital world. In Digital Empires , her provocative follow-up to The Brussels Effect , Anu Bradford explores a rivalry that will shape the world in the decades to come.
Across the globe, people dependent on digital technologies have become increasingly alarmed that their rapid adoption and transformation have ushered in an exceedingly concentrated economy where a few powerful companies control vast economic wealth and political power, undermine data privacy, and widen the gap between economic winners and losers. In response, world leaders are variously embracing the idea of reining in the most dominant tech companies. Bradford examines three competing regulatory approaches―the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven regulatory model―and discusses how governments and tech companies navigate the inevitable conflicts that arise when these regulatory approaches collide in the international domain. Which digital empire will prevail in the contest for global influence remains an open question, yet their contrasting strategies are increasingly clear.
Digital societies are at an inflection point. In the midst of these unfolding regulatory battles, governments, tech companies, and digital citizens are making important choices that will shape the future ethos of the digital society. Digital Empires lays bare the choices we face as societies and individuals, explains the forces that shape those choices, and illuminates the immense stakes involved for everyone who uses digital technologies.
Across the globe, people dependent on digital technologies have become increasingly alarmed that their rapid adoption and transformation have ushered in an exceedingly concentrated economy where a few powerful companies control vast economic wealth and political power, undermine data privacy, and widen the gap between economic winners and losers. In response, world leaders are variously embracing the idea of reining in the most dominant tech companies. Bradford examines three competing regulatory approaches―the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven regulatory model―and discusses how governments and tech companies navigate the inevitable conflicts that arise when these regulatory approaches collide in the international domain. Which digital empire will prevail in the contest for global influence remains an open question, yet their contrasting strategies are increasingly clear.
Digital societies are at an inflection point. In the midst of these unfolding regulatory battles, governments, tech companies, and digital citizens are making important choices that will shape the future ethos of the digital society. Digital Empires lays bare the choices we face as societies and individuals, explains the forces that shape those choices, and illuminates the immense stakes involved for everyone who uses digital technologies.
608 pages, Hardcover
Published September 26, 2023
106 people are currently reading
1101 people want to read
About the author
Anu Bradford
2 books47 followersAnu Bradford is Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization at Columbia Law School. She is also a director for the European Legal Studies Center and Chazen Senior Scholar at Columbia Business School. Her writing focuses on European Union law, international trade law, and comparative and international antitrust law. Before joining the Law School faculty in 2012, she was an assistant professor at the University of Chicago Law School.
Bradford earned her S.J.D. degree in 2007 and LL.M. degree in 2002 from Harvard Law School, and also holds a law degree from the University of Helsinki. After completing her LL.M. studies as a Fulbright Scholar at Harvard Law School, Bradford practiced antitrust law and EU law at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton in Brussels for two years before returning to Harvard for her doctoral studies. She has also served as an adviser on economic policy in the Parliament of Finland and as an expert assistant to a member of the European Parliament.
Bradford grew up in Finland, and lives today in New York with her husband and three children.
Bradford earned her S.J.D. degree in 2007 and LL.M. degree in 2002 from Harvard Law School, and also holds a law degree from the University of Helsinki. After completing her LL.M. studies as a Fulbright Scholar at Harvard Law School, Bradford practiced antitrust law and EU law at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton in Brussels for two years before returning to Harvard for her doctoral studies. She has also served as an adviser on economic policy in the Parliament of Finland and as an expert assistant to a member of the European Parliament.
Bradford grew up in Finland, and lives today in New York with her husband and three children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
October 5, 2023
As Generative AI models keep being launched into the world at a rapid pace, debates about whether and to what extent AI should be regulated have also further intensified. As #GenAI places powerful applications and tools in the hands of hundreds of millions of people globally, different paradigms regarding the regulation of technology around the world are becoming visible.
The timing of the launch of Anu Bradford's "Digital Empires: the Global Battle to Regulate Technology" last week is therefore very much on point. Bradford is known for her previous book "The Brussels Effect" (2020), in which she elaborately argues how the EU applies its market power to export regulation worldwide. The essence of the Brussels Effect is that compliance with European regulations and standards is inevitable for access to the EU's large internal market. Non-European companies and governments alike consequently have various incentives to apply EU(-inspired) regulation outside Europe as well, such as on competition law, consumer protection, and the digital economy.
In "Digital Empires", Bradford delves deeper into global regulation of the digital economy. She outlines the characteristic features of the three main regions: the free market-driven, hands-off model of the United States, the value-driven regulatory model of the EU, and the state-driven model of China. At first glance, these may look like clearly distinct blocs, but using a wealth of detailed examples, Bradford demonstrates that in practice, the patchwork of mutual interests, alliances, deals, and investments can be nuanced, complex, and contradictory.
She does so by distinguishing between different types of tech regulation battles. Horizontal ones, amongst the three power blocs themselves, but also vertical battles, between governments and tech companies within regions. Even "diagonal" battles can have significant impact, such as between American and Chinese companies and EU lawmakers. Refreshingly, Bradford also pays ample attention to the influence of these three paradigms in other regions. Africa, Asia, and Latin America have all to various extents been the subject of the US evangelizing global internet freedom, large-scale Chinese investments in digital infrastructure, and parliaments emulating (elements of) EU regulation in their own right.
In the horizontal battle, from a global perspective, a lot of focus currently rests on the increasing technological power struggle between the US and China. It is a core element of the broader decoupling of these two superpowers in their battle for global hegemony. Their ongoing digital economic disentanglement is undeniable, Bradford argues. But interestingly enough, this forces the US to uneasily embrace elements of the Chinese state-driven regulatory model: sanctioning and shielding Chinese infrastructure and investments are hard to reconcile with global free-market thinking. At the same time, the mutual digital interdependence – financial, economic, and also in terms of research and talent - between the two countries is so strong that both blocs constantly have to balance their desire for autonomy with the need to keep their digital ecosystems profitable.
Between the US and the EU, a diagonal battle has waged long between American tech companies and European regulators on issues including privacy, competition, and taxation. Big Tech has lobbied strongly against European rules, accusing the EU of protectionism due to its inability to innovate and scale (AI) technology on its own. Still, as soon as the dust of the legislative struggle for privacy settled, a company like Microsoft decided to conform globally to European privacy rules in the GDPR. But in terms of data exchange between the US and EU, a lengthy horizontal power struggle revolving around the balance between surveillance (US) and privacy (EU) keeps dragging on, with European judges regularly declaring transatlantic data exchange agreements invalid, sending officials and lawyers in Brussels and Washington back to the drawing board.
Despite disagreements on a variety of issues and levels, under the Biden-administration, additional communication channels were opened to seek transatlantic rapprochement on digital files. And the belief in human-centric technology regulation is no longer confined to Europe, Bradford argues. Faith in the American laissez-faire market-driven regulatory model is starting to wane, even in the US itself: a large majority of Americans now prefer strong AI regulation. Still, to what extent the EU will also have a "Brussels effect" on federal AI legislation in the US remains to be seen: not only is the sharply polarized US Congress incapable of legislating AI swiftly, but critics also argue that the effect might be much weaker in the context of AI seen to Europe's industry lagging far behind China and the US in the global AI ecosystem.
Notwithstanding economic leverage in AI, according to Bradford, the EU and the US have a much broader, ideological interest in rapprochement and cooperation. After all, they both are techno-democracies: only together will they be able to make strides in the global battle against techno-autocracy China and the dozens of countries already implementing its surveillance model as part of its sphere of influence. In doing so, the US and the EU must not only fight horizontally with China, but also show vertically that they, as democratic countries, can keep tech companies in check. The Chinese government has recently succeeded in doing exactly that with its own industry. And that raises the long-term question to what extent democracies, like autocracies, will be able to gain control over the digital economy, but then embedded within open, democratic societies.
The timing of the launch of Anu Bradford's "Digital Empires: the Global Battle to Regulate Technology" last week is therefore very much on point. Bradford is known for her previous book "The Brussels Effect" (2020), in which she elaborately argues how the EU applies its market power to export regulation worldwide. The essence of the Brussels Effect is that compliance with European regulations and standards is inevitable for access to the EU's large internal market. Non-European companies and governments alike consequently have various incentives to apply EU(-inspired) regulation outside Europe as well, such as on competition law, consumer protection, and the digital economy.
In "Digital Empires", Bradford delves deeper into global regulation of the digital economy. She outlines the characteristic features of the three main regions: the free market-driven, hands-off model of the United States, the value-driven regulatory model of the EU, and the state-driven model of China. At first glance, these may look like clearly distinct blocs, but using a wealth of detailed examples, Bradford demonstrates that in practice, the patchwork of mutual interests, alliances, deals, and investments can be nuanced, complex, and contradictory.
She does so by distinguishing between different types of tech regulation battles. Horizontal ones, amongst the three power blocs themselves, but also vertical battles, between governments and tech companies within regions. Even "diagonal" battles can have significant impact, such as between American and Chinese companies and EU lawmakers. Refreshingly, Bradford also pays ample attention to the influence of these three paradigms in other regions. Africa, Asia, and Latin America have all to various extents been the subject of the US evangelizing global internet freedom, large-scale Chinese investments in digital infrastructure, and parliaments emulating (elements of) EU regulation in their own right.
In the horizontal battle, from a global perspective, a lot of focus currently rests on the increasing technological power struggle between the US and China. It is a core element of the broader decoupling of these two superpowers in their battle for global hegemony. Their ongoing digital economic disentanglement is undeniable, Bradford argues. But interestingly enough, this forces the US to uneasily embrace elements of the Chinese state-driven regulatory model: sanctioning and shielding Chinese infrastructure and investments are hard to reconcile with global free-market thinking. At the same time, the mutual digital interdependence – financial, economic, and also in terms of research and talent - between the two countries is so strong that both blocs constantly have to balance their desire for autonomy with the need to keep their digital ecosystems profitable.
Between the US and the EU, a diagonal battle has waged long between American tech companies and European regulators on issues including privacy, competition, and taxation. Big Tech has lobbied strongly against European rules, accusing the EU of protectionism due to its inability to innovate and scale (AI) technology on its own. Still, as soon as the dust of the legislative struggle for privacy settled, a company like Microsoft decided to conform globally to European privacy rules in the GDPR. But in terms of data exchange between the US and EU, a lengthy horizontal power struggle revolving around the balance between surveillance (US) and privacy (EU) keeps dragging on, with European judges regularly declaring transatlantic data exchange agreements invalid, sending officials and lawyers in Brussels and Washington back to the drawing board.
Despite disagreements on a variety of issues and levels, under the Biden-administration, additional communication channels were opened to seek transatlantic rapprochement on digital files. And the belief in human-centric technology regulation is no longer confined to Europe, Bradford argues. Faith in the American laissez-faire market-driven regulatory model is starting to wane, even in the US itself: a large majority of Americans now prefer strong AI regulation. Still, to what extent the EU will also have a "Brussels effect" on federal AI legislation in the US remains to be seen: not only is the sharply polarized US Congress incapable of legislating AI swiftly, but critics also argue that the effect might be much weaker in the context of AI seen to Europe's industry lagging far behind China and the US in the global AI ecosystem.
Notwithstanding economic leverage in AI, according to Bradford, the EU and the US have a much broader, ideological interest in rapprochement and cooperation. After all, they both are techno-democracies: only together will they be able to make strides in the global battle against techno-autocracy China and the dozens of countries already implementing its surveillance model as part of its sphere of influence. In doing so, the US and the EU must not only fight horizontally with China, but also show vertically that they, as democratic countries, can keep tech companies in check. The Chinese government has recently succeeded in doing exactly that with its own industry. And that raises the long-term question to what extent democracies, like autocracies, will be able to gain control over the digital economy, but then embedded within open, democratic societies.
April 20, 2025
Took me a while to get through this one. The last chapters were the most interesting for me, especially the parts about EU digital policies. The author got a bit repetitive at times and sometimes it felt like reading a list of facts. But with everything going on in the world right now, the book actually aged pretty well. Curious to see what the author comes up with next!
October 24, 2023
Dense, essential reading if you want to catch up on regulation over the digital space — with some additions in AI — by the three largest states today: US, China and the EU. I would highly recommend this book but with some caution: while Bradford’s research is impressive, it feels like an info dump of research — that could use way more culling and editing. While some parts were engrossing, others felt like a repetition and could be shortened. What I found compelling about this book was Bradford’s central thesis — which honestly brought me back to A levels history — on the nature of the rivalry between US, China and Europe.
This book builds on Bradford’s previous thesis called the Brussels Effect, a phenomenon where “the EU often shapes the global business practices of leading tech companies, which often extend these EU regulations across their global business operations in an effort to standardize their products and services worldwide”. This is due to the size of the EU market, the affluence of European consumers, and the high cost of customising digital products to different geographies.
Moving on to the thesis, Bradford posits that each state is trying to build their empire by exporting their view of the world: market-driven (US), state-driven (China), rights-driven (Europe).
Next, she introduces the matrixed concept of horizontal vs vertical battles: “There is a horizontal battle among different governments, as illustrated by the conflicts among the US, China, and the EU over the norms and values that govern the digital economy. However, this horizontal battle among the governments is shaped by—and often fought through—vertical battles between governments and the tech companies that these governments are seeking to regulate. These vertical battles have evolved differently in each jurisdiction, consistent with the differences in the three regulatory models.
[…] Tech companies are both targets as well as tools for governments. Governments seek to restrain these companies while simultaneously deploying them in fighting horizontal battles, turning the vertical relationship into a delicate balancing act.
[…] For example, China relies on its tech companies to conduct surveillance and enforce censorship, the US harnesses its tech sector to pursue its national security goals, and the EU delegates to these companies the task of enforcing many of its data privacy and content moderation norms.”
Then Bradford goes into impressive research by digging deeper into the history and current state of regulation in the US, China and the EU, covering their pros and cons. In the final chapter, she concludes that “these balancing impulses within each jurisdiction moderate the extremes and pave the way for a world characterized by limited cooperation, managed conflict, or bearable coexistence. These forces of restraint also explain why the continuing conflicts are unlikely to lead to full technological decoupling.”
As such, we continue to live in “the age of unpeace: a geopolitical order where states are too interconnected to fight an all-out war but too discordant to live in genuine peace.” Great topic, definitely one that all business schools should include in their curriculum.
This book builds on Bradford’s previous thesis called the Brussels Effect, a phenomenon where “the EU often shapes the global business practices of leading tech companies, which often extend these EU regulations across their global business operations in an effort to standardize their products and services worldwide”. This is due to the size of the EU market, the affluence of European consumers, and the high cost of customising digital products to different geographies.
Moving on to the thesis, Bradford posits that each state is trying to build their empire by exporting their view of the world: market-driven (US), state-driven (China), rights-driven (Europe).
Next, she introduces the matrixed concept of horizontal vs vertical battles: “There is a horizontal battle among different governments, as illustrated by the conflicts among the US, China, and the EU over the norms and values that govern the digital economy. However, this horizontal battle among the governments is shaped by—and often fought through—vertical battles between governments and the tech companies that these governments are seeking to regulate. These vertical battles have evolved differently in each jurisdiction, consistent with the differences in the three regulatory models.
[…] Tech companies are both targets as well as tools for governments. Governments seek to restrain these companies while simultaneously deploying them in fighting horizontal battles, turning the vertical relationship into a delicate balancing act.
[…] For example, China relies on its tech companies to conduct surveillance and enforce censorship, the US harnesses its tech sector to pursue its national security goals, and the EU delegates to these companies the task of enforcing many of its data privacy and content moderation norms.”
Then Bradford goes into impressive research by digging deeper into the history and current state of regulation in the US, China and the EU, covering their pros and cons. In the final chapter, she concludes that “these balancing impulses within each jurisdiction moderate the extremes and pave the way for a world characterized by limited cooperation, managed conflict, or bearable coexistence. These forces of restraint also explain why the continuing conflicts are unlikely to lead to full technological decoupling.”
As such, we continue to live in “the age of unpeace: a geopolitical order where states are too interconnected to fight an all-out war but too discordant to live in genuine peace.” Great topic, definitely one that all business schools should include in their curriculum.
January 26, 2025
“the US's digital economy often falls short on its techno-libertarian promise to be the amplifier of liberal democracy and individual freedoms. questioning the long-held assumption • that democracy and freedom will inevitably ensue as long as we leave ' technology companies alone. It also suggests that the US has for too long been focusing on the benefits of the market-driven regulatory model, unwilling to revisit it for fear of losing the benefits of the free market and a free society. while refusing to admit its drawbacks that are now cascading and fueling resentment against tech companies. The discontent with abuses of market power, repeated privacy violations, and repugnant speech online are shaking the US's own faith in the regulatory model that it created and has championed for the past twenty-five years. Consequently, US regulators must now rethink their own commitment to the market-driven regulatory model. Its deficiencies are weakening the US's position in its horizontal battle against the EU and China and explain why the market-driven model is quickly losing its domestic and global appeal, while also undermining the US government's efforts to counter the growing attractiveness of the Chinese state-driven regulatory model.”
“Huawei is not trying to hide the power of its surveillance equipment. boasting on its website how "Big Brother monitors their goings-on from miles away" in Nairobi.”
“Choosing to regulate the tech industry in the name of safeguarding individual rights and societal freedoms is not where the problem lies. The EU’s tech companies lack of success may not be attributable to the regulation they face.”
1) no substantial regulation in Europe at the times of the tech giants founding in the U.S., yet they were founded in the U.S. (bar Spotify)
2) EU tech prosecution has overwhelmingly targeted US companies
3) EU’s fragmented digital single market
4) underdeveloped capital markets
5) punitive bankruptcy laws deferring risk taking
6) absence of proactive immigration (ie not replicating the USA’s wildly intentional and successful H1B’s success in attracting the worlds best lawyers doctors scientists and engineers)
“Huawei is not trying to hide the power of its surveillance equipment. boasting on its website how "Big Brother monitors their goings-on from miles away" in Nairobi.”
“Choosing to regulate the tech industry in the name of safeguarding individual rights and societal freedoms is not where the problem lies. The EU’s tech companies lack of success may not be attributable to the regulation they face.”
1) no substantial regulation in Europe at the times of the tech giants founding in the U.S., yet they were founded in the U.S. (bar Spotify)
2) EU tech prosecution has overwhelmingly targeted US companies
3) EU’s fragmented digital single market
4) underdeveloped capital markets
5) punitive bankruptcy laws deferring risk taking
6) absence of proactive immigration (ie not replicating the USA’s wildly intentional and successful H1B’s success in attracting the worlds best lawyers doctors scientists and engineers)
November 25, 2023
The USA, China and the EU: all three superpowers pursue different strategies when it comes to regulating the internet: Market-based in the case of the US, rights-based in the EU and fully focused on maintaining state control in the case of China. And while these these approaches are motivated by domestic policy, they have by now developed into geopolitical strategies. The chapters on the different regulatory approaches are historically and descriptive and not particularly analytical for observers of tech policy around the globe. What is remarkable, however, is that Bradford sees a convergence between the American and European approaches in favour of rights-based regulation in the EU - and that she is critical of the EU's industrial policy-driven efforts to create its own "digital champions" through asymmetric regulation. An attempt that Bradford believes is doomed to failure. A highly topical book in this respect!
December 30, 2023
Global Food for Thought On Digital Society Futures
Highly recommended reading for anyone interested in possible digital economy and society trajectories from a global perspective, as well as the issues and mechanisms of relevance. Readers may quibble at details, but certainly this books provides for a compelling higher level prism to view current key global developments, whether you wake up in Beijing, Brussels, DC, Silicon Valley and the many places elsewhere!
The book does not yet cover the rapid developments in GenAI for 2023 and the new EI regulations, or subtopics such as digital and hard warfare (will we have to deal with a chemical weapons regulators equivalent for AI in the e future?!). Perhaps subjects for ongoing epilogues to a rapidly developing set of spaces!
Highly recommended reading for anyone interested in possible digital economy and society trajectories from a global perspective, as well as the issues and mechanisms of relevance. Readers may quibble at details, but certainly this books provides for a compelling higher level prism to view current key global developments, whether you wake up in Beijing, Brussels, DC, Silicon Valley and the many places elsewhere!
The book does not yet cover the rapid developments in GenAI for 2023 and the new EI regulations, or subtopics such as digital and hard warfare (will we have to deal with a chemical weapons regulators equivalent for AI in the e future?!). Perhaps subjects for ongoing epilogues to a rapidly developing set of spaces!
August 8, 2025
Aun Bradford is a reference to understand how the digital world is evolving in the last twenty years. This book focuses on the differences and similarities between the three great powers in tech as of today, the US, China and the EU. In a sometimes too repetitive way, but always incisive, she explains how things are more grey than what they seem at the beginning. The US is market-driven ,yes. China is state-driven and the EU is rights-driven. But we see aspects of all domains in each of the countries as the strategic autonomy and nationalisms continue increasing,
Having read it in 2025, I feel many things have happened since the author wrote the book, so some of the statements about how the US and the EU may be getting closer to a common understanding do not make sense to me now. We will see.
Having read it in 2025, I feel many things have happened since the author wrote the book, so some of the statements about how the US and the EU may be getting closer to a common understanding do not make sense to me now. We will see.
October 26, 2025
Wow, this is an amazing and interesting book
The book "Digital Empires" by Anu Bradford provides a comprehensive analysis of the global battle for technological dominance, using the US, China, and EU as prime examples. Beyond the specific cases and practices, the book likely offers insights into the broader implications of these regulatory models on global governance, innovation, and individual rights.
The author's expertise in comparative and international law adds depth to the discussion, (into the past, present and future) highlighting the complexities of regulating technology in a rapidly evolving landscape. The book also touch on the potential consequences of these regulatory approaches on global cooperation, conflict, and the future of digital societies.
The book "Digital Empires" by Anu Bradford provides a comprehensive analysis of the global battle for technological dominance, using the US, China, and EU as prime examples. Beyond the specific cases and practices, the book likely offers insights into the broader implications of these regulatory models on global governance, innovation, and individual rights.
The author's expertise in comparative and international law adds depth to the discussion, (into the past, present and future) highlighting the complexities of regulating technology in a rapidly evolving landscape. The book also touch on the potential consequences of these regulatory approaches on global cooperation, conflict, and the future of digital societies.
February 11, 2025
A must read book for those interested in the crossroad between technology and geopolitics. The author started with a description of the different views that US, EU and China hold about what should be the driver of technology development. Market vs Rights vs State, respectively, as the main priority to take into consideration on the development of public policies. Also the book provides a vision on the clashes between each of these three economic areas as they try to impose their view as a global standard.
January 11, 2026
A pesar de que ya está un poco desfasado porque no recoge la última presidencia de Trump, lo cual afecta claramente a la postura de EEUU, el libro es muy interesante y muy didáctico. Le pongo 5 estrellas aunque a veces puede resultar un poco reiterativo pero lo compensa con creces el hecho de que está escrito con un lenguaje muy claro y que esa misma reiteración hace que se entienda y se retengan las ideas que intenta transmitir la autora.
August 1, 2025
A sensação de se beliscar sobre o tecnopólio e as oligarquias de empresas de dados. Alcançando (e desabando) tudo em nome de uma suposta eficiência e conectividade
‘The age of unpeace: a geopolitical order where states are too interconnected to fight an all-our war but too discordand to live in genuine peace’
‘The age of unpeace: a geopolitical order where states are too interconnected to fight an all-our war but too discordand to live in genuine peace’
November 12, 2024
Interesting facts and overview, but didn’t find it compelling as a whole. It is often little specific, and does not really tell me why these technologies matter. Also missed the point in some instances imo
May 29, 2025
Comprehensive descriptive account of the latest regulation coming from the US, China, and the EU. This book is a good introduction, aiming for breadth than depth. Beyond that, the book can be reductive in its analysis. The framing itself, with the rest of the world invisible, is overly simplistic.
January 5, 2025
A good overview on digital empires. However, this book will go out of date soon.. Trump, UvdL, … also, it could have been analyzed a little deeper.
February 14, 2025
интересная теоретическая рамка, много материала (шутка ли, сноски - буквально половина книги). если отфильтровать политическую окраску в интерпретациях, можно полезное почерпнуть
April 10, 2025
A terrific primer on digital tech policy around the world. Enlightening, extremely detailed and (thankfully) written in plain language rather than academic jargon or legalese.
Currently reading
May 24, 2025can u tell my attention span is taking a hit
February 6, 2024
Good read, gets a bit repetitive. Overweights the power of the EU. Overall informative on how tech is regulated throughout the globe.
October 26, 2024
There are three global powers - the U.S., Europe, and China - each with different approaches to technology. The U.S. has long held a market-based approach, China authoritarian, and Europe rights-based regulation, which the author favors. However, U.S. influence is declining as it becomes more isolationist and as countries grow more wary of its tech mega-companies, and globally countries are choosing between the Chinese and European approaches. Sobering information here about how many countries are adopting Chinese technology to create "smart cities" with constant surveillance. Interesting discussion about why Europe has lagged behind the U.S. and China on technological innovation - the author does not believe it is because of over-regulation. The author is coming from a center-left perspective and does not broach conservative concerns about tech censorship, which is a gap in an otherwise comprehensive discussion of American tech policy debates. Overall, this is a good discussion, but written like a term paper and a bit dry.
July 25, 2025
Book that makes tech regulation feel like global Game of Thrones—with less dragons, more data. Turns out the EU, US, and China are in a passive-aggressive group chat. Recommend!
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews