Like, does it make sense to say you should not have access today if you're 14, but you are still responsible for something that you did when you posted, you know, 15 years ago?

Yeah, I mean, I agree with Pat's comments.

You can hold people accountable for something they said that was horrible and defenseless while also saying, well, do they have a pattern? Do they have a history of doing this? And if not, then you can say, well, maybe they've grown up and changed their mind.

Look, our kids were unpaid beta testers for social media, and it's an example where self-regulation absolutely failed kids in America.

Now, we do have some better laws, but you can't make up for the last 15 plus years, and we don't have the right to be forgotten in the United States.

The European Union does, but we do not.

The closest thing we have to it is some of the laws that California and New York have passed.

I mean, stuff, you know, I wouldn't want my bosses to see that now.

Is that realistic? Could that be the solution?

It'll be one of many solutions, just like our cybersecurity today involves having multi-factor authentication.

It involves having alerts and monitoring for anomalous behaviors.

There's going to be multiple things that have to be put into play here.

But NVIDIA is on the right track.

I love the idea of governance is built in.

uh... security by design safety by design being built and and basically holding itself accountable i'd love to see more come out of uh...

Are there certain sectors or areas that you're most concerned about? I mean, in the context of what could go wrong, what are you as a cybersecurity expert most worried about?

For folks who aren't keeping a super close eye the way that you are on this topic, what is in the works when it comes to a potential AI agreement between the two countries?

Yeah, sure, absolutely.

And for anybody listening or watching that feels behind, don't worry, we're all behind.

Stuff is happening on this, it seems like by the minute.

But so an agreement has been made, there will be an emergency AI incident notification center.

This is the equivalent of the nuclear red phone that is in place across different countries, especially Russia and the United States.

So if there were an incident that were discovered and underway that would cause either country grave harm, there would actually be a red phone kind of construct to be able to notify and basically take diplomatic actions versus non-diplomatic actions.

So as someone who did spend years working with politics and technology, does it scare you when you would talk to people who are actually regulating these technologies and you realize that they don't have a ton of knowledge about them?

of want to bubble wrap my children and let them play Super Mario and go on Zoom for their classes, but otherwise just how do we protect our kids from all of this stuff? And like the algorithm too, like how do I protect them from the algorithm? Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, this is a tough question.

I know with each of our kids, we told them they would not be on social media until they were at least 14.

And they would say things like, Everybody else is on it.

I'm like, nope, I met the one other mother who agrees with me.

So the two of you are not on it, and it's going to be just fine.

And, you know, over time, my kids thanked me because they had their friends get in trouble for doing silly things online because you're not mature enough to handle – the power that is social media.

You're shaking your head.

What kind of applications are we talking about here? Where does it apply in this administration or across the government?

Yeah, no, I think it's a really great question.

And, you know, what...

What we've seen in the past is if you have an American company creating some type of a product and there's concerns about sort of foreign advancements happening, if they were able to get access to the products, you've seen where products in the past have been banned.

Look at chip bans on computer chips where it says you can't directly sell your chips to China or Russia or North Korea anymore.

So different precedents like that are set.

But this is slightly unprecedented because in this case, and people may be thinking to themselves, what's the big deal? Like if I'm using chat GPT, why would something like that be banned? This is the more advanced models.

And it has often happened, technology is moving far faster than Congress, which moves at the express speed of a tired snail oftentimes, right? How do we catch up? How do we make sure that the regulations, the rules, that people understand the game they're playing, at least the citizens understand the game that's being played? That would be nice, wouldn't it?

Do you think this is a coincidence, or would you say we're watching more of a deliberate strategy unfold?

Yeah, I love the question because in my opinion, there's no coincidences in cyber warfare.

This really appears to be a highly calculated campaign, which is targeting, you know, really the American education system.

You know, threat actors realize they don't need to breach, you know, as Mike said, all of the different school districts and the systems when they can compromise three or four software vendors, right? that hold the keys to all of them.

And the other thing that I would say about the timing, because I'm raising three Gen Zs myself, is this wasn't a standard network lockdown.

This was really a psychological ambush.

By doing this at the exact time they did on the school calendar, they weren't just encrypting servers.

Lastly, if you could say one thing to every school superintendent in America listening to this right now, what would it be?

How do you think about it?

Well, as sort of, you know, for mankind, quantum computing, if we do it right and get it right on sort of the environmental impacts and issues, is going to be incredible.

It's going to allow us to solve problems that we haven't solved before because massive amounts of data, volumes, mathematical problems, and we truly will see breakthroughs, I believe, in healthcare, protecting the environment, and a lot of other issues on everybody's minds.

However, in the wrong hands, you know, it's a tool.

And so the tool is neither good nor bad.

It's just how is it wielded.

And in the wrong hands, this quantum computing tool could be used to sort of do decryption of on previously stolen data that has been encrypted based on yesterday's and today's standards.

Are there some things that are really worrying you in the back of your mind?

Should these be part of our diet when it comes to healthy shopping?

Yeah, I love the fact that you brought this up because I personally use these websites, especially if I'm going to a site I've never ordered from before, even if I have a friend or a relative tell me they've used this site.

So things like Scam Advisor, URL Void, Trustpilot, and I will post these on my social media accounts.

These websites will actually tell you how old the domain name is.

It could be legitimately a brand new business or it might be a scam or fraudster taking advantage of holidays.

So it'll also tell you whether or not security companies or consumers have reported issues with these sites.

And of course, old school still rules.

Are people using other payment solutions that might not have that same level of protection?

So what do you worry about what seems to be the worst case scenario with AI, which is that we lose control? Yes.

Do you really? I really do worry about that.

Okay.

How far away is that if it happens? Well, I think there's a lot of really smart people around the world, New Zealand included, who are having really hard conversations around governance and guardrails for AI.

So my hope is those hard conversations will turn into governance and guardrails before we hit this.

But I do think 2027, 2028, if we don't get this right now, this isn't...

You know how we put things off with social media and it's still a little bit of a dumpster fire sometimes? Yeah, yeah.

And doesn't that just actually, doesn't AI have the ability here to actually just make that

What is the thing that you are most worried about?

I worry about losing human essence as part of sort of the story.

And so, for example, I've watched side by sides of the same person interacting with a customer service agent.

You can hear their voice and you can hear the human essence and the interaction between the two.

And then they opted in the next phone call to talk to a customer service bot because they didn't have to wait if they talked to the bot.

And they started responding like the robot, like without the essence, like it was like kind of rude and short.

So if we spend more time of our day interacting with customer service chatbots instead of each other.

And the

From a pure technology standpoint, how do you think this is going to work, re the algorithm, or is it going to work at all?

Well, hopefully they've got some really great engineers working on this.

So whenever you kind of go into this mode of there's going to be a master copy and then we're going to have our own local regional copy, but it's going to be essentially the same except for it's not.

We're going to be training it on U.S. data.

I end up having a lot of questions like what's the quality assurance for this? will it still feel and look the same? I mean, TikTok may lose its hip and cool factor once we take sort of the global piece out of it and start to run it locally.

So it'll be very interesting to see what the knowledge transfer will be.

I know as part of Project Dallas, TikTok USA has been doing a lot of work to be in compliance with the foreign control kind of regulations around CFIUS.

How does that technically work and how does that make us understand it from a national security perspective?

What do you make of it?

Well, all I know is we're gonna have to figure out there's a long race here and a short race here.

And we have to secure not only our global leadership, but also our intellectual property.

And that's really some of the underpinning of the discussions here of, is there a 15%? Is there not a 15%? What does this mean from an export control? So a lot more to come on this, but obviously China is amping up their part in the race, trying to win the global war on who's gonna dominate AI.

What is the IP risk? Well, the IP risk, so even though we're talking about sending a modified chip over to China, in my opinion, based on my years of experience, it's like handing over the keys to your R&D lab and saying, just be in the small QA lab, not in the bigger lab, and don't look around.

You wouldn't hand the keys to your R&D lab to your competitor And China is our global competitor here for this technology.

So really what we're thinking about here is how could they get access to these chips and perhaps reverse engineer everything from performance to how things behave.

What would it face in terms of legal issues?

Do you think they should have free reign to poke and prod at end of process? Or is there a limit to where their access should begin and end?

I'm going to assume, just having been sort of on the inside of the fishbowl with everybody looking in from the outside, I'm going to assume that White House counsel, the Office of Management and Budget, that everybody's gone over the types of authorities that Doe should have, either considered special government employees, contractors, or whatever designation they've been given.

And so they are going to run the programs.

They're going to run the processes and get to the root cause, just like an external contractor, consultant, auditor would do, just as an inspector general would do.

So whatever authorities they've been given based on the roles that they've been placed in, I'm going to assume White House counsel has that all covered.

So the access... would be controlled and the reports and outcomes would be controlled and transparent.

And candidly, I'd rather have Doge have access than Chinese nation states, Russian nation states, and Iran nation states, who, by the way, are part of those over 32,000 incidents that happened most recently, too.

But wouldn't the process of eliminating the complexity and having a wholesale rethink of how the government does cybersecurity and data management and everything else be a little bit more of a considered process where you would get Congress involved and you say, this is what we're going to need to spend to upgrade systems and then have a little more of a stepped out process? I think the concern here is they're kind of looking for expense line items and things that Elon Musk can post about what's going on in the government as opposed to, hey, we want to protect all the data and do things more efficiently.

So what is the formula to achieve what Donald Trump has set as a policy goal, that is U.S. leadership and AI?

No, you're right about that.

This sort of this open source method in which DeepSeek was released.

It's now the top downloaded free app at the Apple Store.

Definitely got around sort of the different protocols that were put in place by the U.S. government over the last couple of years.

And so it shows that although regulatory frameworks are incredibly helpful to set the right standard and the right tone, that sometimes regulatory frameworks don't serve us and they get in the way of innovation.

So we're going to have to figure out how do we go back to the drawing board and look at how we engineer AI in the United States today and ask ourselves, what can we be doing differently? And it's a race.

How do you think this will be able to be responded to? Is it right that we can't access it here in the United States?