This has basically the highest insanity * prominence of speaker product I've ever seen. The same geniuses who want to ban encryption and can't manage to get a CRUD website up and running without a 8-figure budget will regulate the existence of algorithms (i.e., math) routinely generated by groups of <4 or so researchers.
Of course, people will be glad to "demonstrate their capabilities" to the group that's responsible for shutting them down if they're "too capable".
"it’s important to write the regulations in such a way that they provide protection while producing minimal drag on innovation (though there will be some unavoidable cost)."
Has this man ever seen a government regulatory framework operate?
"To state the obvious, one of the biggest challenges is that the US has broken all trust with the tech community over the past couple of years. We’d need a new agency to do this."
Don't worry guys! This is a new agency!
"Regulation would have an effect on SMI development via financing—most venture firms and large technology companies don’t want to break major laws. Most venture-backed startups and large companies would presumably comply with the regulations."
Here's the nugget. The only way this article makes any sense at all is as a completely disingenuous argument devoted to making it impossible to invest in technology companies, period (please tell me what "technology company" does not have at least some algorithmic or optimization component), without having a large compliance department and having greased the right palms. I don't particularly think he's that Machiavellian, but it seems like that or the alternative...