What does the underlying infrastructure need to look like to make that kind of long-running agentic operation possible?

Yeah, it's a, it's a really good question.

You know, at a high level, this has to look less like a chat session and more like a secure, durable engineering service.

A long-running agent needs a system of record beyond a context window.

The harness around the model has to preserve workflow state, inputs, artifacts, decisions and approvals, checkpoint progress, and resume safely after a tool failure or a human handoff.

It also needs enterprise controls, scoped identity, permissioned tool access, isolation and audit trails, observability, and explicit checkpoints where an engineer can inspect or redirect the work.

That's how you make it governable.

Where do you see all of this going in the more near term, say, the next two to three years? And what are some of the milestones you think we should look out for that would signal we have actually genuinely moved beyond automation into trusted agentic engineering?

Just explain your role, please.

Yeah.

So you nailed it on the head with the easy part, which is what we don't do.

We do not build a quantum computer.

But we have a vision about how quantum computing will be useful, and it's really a point at which we have the integration of larger-scale quantum technologies, quantum processors, as part of... data centers and large-scale computing looks very similar to what we have today.

If you look at today's large-scale computing infrastructure, it's CPUs and GPUs and storage and memory and interconnects, and it's very complex but very heterogeneous.

And each part plays the role that it's best suited for, including the CPU and including the GPU.

What's the market there? How widely is your technology being used in parallel with many of the quantum names that we saw today?